Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/NGC catalog
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following discussion is an archived proposal of the WikiProject below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the project's talk page (if created) or the WikiProject Council). No further edits should be made to this page.
The proposed WikiProject was not created. Closing proposal due to lack of interest. Ajpolino (talk) 20:33, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Description
[edit]To make a complete, or at least partially-complete group of wikipedia articles on the New General Catalog. The astronomy section here, while there is some content, is lacking in dedicated editors. However, before doing this, I want to see if anyone is interested in helping with this. exoplanetaryscience (talk) 17:55, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
List of important pages and categories for this proposed group
- New General Catalog (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Category:NGC objects (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) (number of pages in the category: 961)
- List of WikiProjects currently on the talk pages of those articles
- Please invite these and any other similar groups to join the discussion about this proposal. See Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Directory to find similar WikiProjects.
- Why do you want to start a new group, instead of joining one of these existing groups?
- There don't appear to be many people actively contributing to the NGC catalog and I wanted to make an organized group keen on doing so.
Support
[edit]Also, specify whether or not you would join the project.
Oppose
[edit]- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 06:53, 24 December 2014 (UTC) -- This can be handled through WP:WikiProject Astronomical objects as other catalogues have been[reply]
- I oppose an entirely new project for the NGC catalogue, as it fits well under WP:ASTRO. However, creating a task force, similar to the constellations task force that currently exists, may spur creation and expansion of NGC catalogue articles, and thus I would support the creation of such a task force. StringTheory11 (t • c) 20:19, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Discussion
[edit]Why don't you just use WP:ASTRO ? This is obviously in scope of that project, and they have previously dealt with the Messier list, and numbered asteroids. Etc. -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 06:50, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, the Messier list is much smaller than the NGC list. As for numbered asteroids, well at least 95% of those should be redirected to their parent lists anyways due to lack of notability (but that's a separate issue that I won't bring up here). The NGC list is both large, and the community has deemed that all objects in it are notable (WP:NASTRO) criterion 2. That being said, a task force would seem to be better suited for this purpose rather than a full project, as with constellations. StringTheory11 (t • c) 20:21, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- A taskforce for maintaining (complete set) objects in significant catalogues (not just restricted to NGC; but all of them where the complete catalogue would be significant) would seem good. Such as also making sure all Hipparchus' time stars are well done, or Sima Qian's star catalogue. (or all such major catalogues prior to the telescope) And for our amateur skygazer audience, also the Caldwell Catalogue -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 01:33, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- I'd say the catalogues that are counted in NASTRO criterion #2 would be given priority. These would be Bayer, Flamsteed, Messier, NGC, and Caldwell; and arguably 3C. StringTheory11 (t • c) 02:59, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Sima Qian, Hipparchus, et al fall under Criterion #1 (naked-eye stars) -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 05:04, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Agreed; we could perhaps also make a whole naked-eye star task force, which would cover all of NASTRO criterion #1? StringTheory11 (t • c) 23:17, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Sima Qian, Hipparchus, et al fall under Criterion #1 (naked-eye stars) -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 05:04, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- I'd say the catalogues that are counted in NASTRO criterion #2 would be given priority. These would be Bayer, Flamsteed, Messier, NGC, and Caldwell; and arguably 3C. StringTheory11 (t • c) 02:59, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- A taskforce for maintaining (complete set) objects in significant catalogues (not just restricted to NGC; but all of them where the complete catalogue would be significant) would seem good. Such as also making sure all Hipparchus' time stars are well done, or Sima Qian's star catalogue. (or all such major catalogues prior to the telescope) And for our amateur skygazer audience, also the Caldwell Catalogue -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 01:33, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the project's talk page (if created) or at the WikiProject Council). No further edits should be made to this page.