Talk:Orbit of Mars

Astronomy: Mars / Solar System Mid‑importance

	Astronomy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.AstronomyWikipedia:WikiProject AstronomyTemplate:WikiProject AstronomyAstronomy articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Mars task force (assessed as High-importance).
	This article is supported by Solar System task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

It's a start

Bare bones so far, but I'm planning more, especially with the improvements by JPL and others. Saros136 (talk) 05:54, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

== Earth days ==hello

The discussion does not support the edit. It is actually on the Mercury talk page, and there the results were mixed. Most of us referred to context, the issue was rotation and the different day lengths (sidereal and solar). In this orbit article, rotation is not mentioned. All readers understand that when discussing the motion of a rotating object, the rate of rotation is irrelevant. They also understand that standard units are used. Day, second, year are all used to describe astronomical quantities. Saros136 (talk) 06:46, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion for correction

The second sentence under the Changes in the orbit section is confusing. It reads, "Still farther from the present, the orbit was near circular at times, but the eccentricity also reaches 0.12." For one thing, "farther" isn't the right word, it should be further. The sentence also changes tenses, going from present, to past, then present. Someone should rewrite it to make it clearer. __209.179.49.94 (talk) 04:00, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I added the dubious tag to alert readers since they apparently don't read the Talk page. 209.179.16.138 (talk) 02:06, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't tended the very article I started. It can be made clearer. But it doesn't deserve the dubious tag. Everything in the sentence is supported by the sourcesSaros136 (talk) 11:33, 30 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Copying

The same web search that found this wiki page also found an external page marked Copyright 2017: The Center for Planetary Science. One page is clearly copied from the other, but I don't see attribution in either direction. I don't know which page came first. Somebody here might be interested. Dnuntius (talk) 03:23, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

According to the present article’s history page, it was created August 3, 2014. On the other hand, the earliest version of the page you linked to that is archived by the Wayback Machine from January 18, 2015, so the present article seems to have priority.

CielProfond (talk) 22:49, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

More data please!

I would like to be able to use WP to source the direction of the major axis of the ellipse; its direction of motion and period of rotation, if any; also the direction of the north and south nodes, their period and direction of rotation, and the angle of inclination of Mars' orbit to the ecliptic. Can someone add these - and not just for Mars but for all the planets? Lucy Skywalker (talk) 16:11, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 14 June 2019

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Not moved. See general agreement below to let these article titles stand. Kudos to editors for your input, and Happy Publishing! (nac by page mover) Paine Ellsworth, ed. ^put'r there 18:06, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It was proposed in this section that multiple pages be renamed and moved.

The discussion has been closed, and the result will be found in the closer's comment.

Links: current log • target log

Orbit of Mars → Mars's orbit
Orbit of Venus → Venus's orbit

– The title is unambiguous. Interstellarity T 🌟 00:47, 14 June 2019 (UTC) --Relisting. — Newslinger talk 03:32, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I plan to abstain until a decision is made at Talk:Earth's orbit. --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 00:55, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. We actually have an article at geocentric orbit and a redirect at Earth orbit. There are no moons or artificial satellites of Mars or Venus. The situation does not seem comparable to me. Note that we have other articles that begin with "Earth's" ([1]) but none with "Mars's" or "Venus's". See this previous discussion. Consensus seems to be that "Earth's" is a natural and normal modifier. Srnec (talk) 01:03, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Mars does have moons. 114.153.213.26 (talk) 02:26, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well that's embarrassing. I was thinking Mercury and Venus. Srnec (talk) 15:36, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Having an article title with an "'s" is generally a bad idea unless absolutely necessary. Rreagan007 (talk) 01:50, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If the Earth discussion is closed as move I support this, if not then not. Crouch, Swale (talk) 05:10, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Same as Crouch, Swale. Masum Reza^📞 13:46, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose "Orbit of Mars" seems generally common. Barca (talk) 18:30, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: Talk:Earth's orbit § Requested move 24 May 2019 has been closed as no consensus, and the article remains at its longstanding title (Earth's orbit). — Newslinger talk 03:32, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Good as it is. Earth's orbit is a reasonable exception for the consistency of Orbit of xxx. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 07:59, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.