|
Template talk:Geography of Mars
created "Template talk:Geography of Mars" - enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 14:31, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-08-20T14:31:00.000Z","author":"Drbogdan","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Drbogdan-2016-08-20T14:31:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->
added copy of earlier relevant discussion - enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 14:45, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-08-20T14:45:00.000Z","author":"Drbogdan","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Drbogdan-2016-08-20T14:45:00.000Z-Proposal:_split_geography_section_into_its_own_template","replies":[]}}-->
Copied from "Template talk:Mars#Proposal: split geography section into its own template":
- Proposal: split geography section into its own template -
As noted by many contributors, this template has ballooned to an unwieldy size. While it is nice to have a synoptic view of all Mars-related topics, it looks like we know too much about Mars for this to be practical. The geography section is overly dominant and too detailed for comfort. As some others have suggested, I would !vote in favor of splitting out the geography into a new navbox Template:Geography of Mars. Then, interested editors can refine the main Mars navbox and the geography navbox independently from each other: the Mars navbox can keep the essential notions of Mars geography to help readers learn and discover, while the detailed geography navbox can satisfy the appetite for detail. Can we get consensus on this step? — JFG talk 07:33, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
- Support. Also, if there is a link to a list, do not include all listed items in the template. -BatteryIncluded (talk) 17:51, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
- Support, also BatteryIncluded's additional suggestion. --JorisvS (talk) 20:46, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
- Support. Seems ok to me atm as well - perhaps first posting a proof of concept template(s) (or equivalent) here before implementing may be helpful? - in any case - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 21:03, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
- Support. Moreover, majority of the listed features can not be placed even in a special geographic template because of complete lack of notability. If anybody wants to make a template with craters (mountains, canyons etc.), he should keep in mind that there are more than 1000 named craters on Mars and about 300 of them have pages in enwiki, so a clear cut-off criterion is required. Stas (talk) 03:18, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
- Support. Also "Spacecraft" sections is covered by navbox {{Mars spacecraft}} already. 109.108.250.225 (talk) 08:11, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
 Done – A bit late, but thankfully there is no deadline. Forked out most of the cruft to a new {{Geography of Mars}} navbox. I have applied it on Eridania Lake as a test. If people like it, we can replace {{Mars}} with that one in hundreds of geography articles. Comments welcome! — JFG talk 18:27, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
- @JFG: FWIW - Thank you *very much* for the new {{Geography of Mars}} template - the new template seems excellent - a worthy and useful supplement to the original {{Mars}} template imo - several possible considerations => add a link from the new {{Geography of Mars}} template to the original {{Mars}} template - and as well - add a link from the original {{Mars}} template to the new {{Geography of Mars}} template - in any case - Thanks again for your efforts - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 19:27, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you, the cleaning was really needed. Some more thoughts:
- some features in the section "Regions" still seem to be insufficiently notable/significant. Iani Chaos, Ultimi Scopuli, Sinus Meridiani, Cydonia seem to have rather local, not global significance (at least, they seem to be less significant than e.g. Hellas Planitia or Valles Marineris, which are not included). Cerberus Hemisphere is a strange thing at all; the corresponding article has no sources and it is unclear even why (and by whom) this "hemisphere" is marked out as a separate entity;
- it would be more logical to move concrete features (North Polar Basin, Tharsis bulge) from section "Geology" to "Regions", and types of features (Undae) from "Regions" to "Geology";
- Template:Geography of Mars still has the problem which I mentioned: random selection of the features and heaps of completely unnotable ones. I propose to leave 10-20 biggest features of each kind (mountain systems, plains, craters etc.; sizes of all of them are accessible in Gazetteer of Planetary Nomenclature). The same problem is in Template:Mercury (planet). Stas (talk) 01:52, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
- Great suggestions; let's move this discussion to Template_Talk:Geography of Mars. — JFG talk 09:08, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you all for addressing the Mars navbar and creating new navbars for is planetary geology. Bravo! -BatteryIncluded (talk) 02:08, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
- @Drbogdan, Stas000D, and BatteryIncluded: My pleasure. Appreciate your thanks. — JFG talk 09:08, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
- Any suggestion on where to place the atmosphere and weather-related articles? Thanks, BatteryIncluded (talk) 17:11, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-08-20T17:11:00.000Z","author":"BatteryIncluded","type":"comment","level":3,"id":"c-BatteryIncluded-2016-08-20T17:11:00.000Z-Additional_comments","replies":[]}}-->
Done (Note: copied from Template talk:Mars#Additional comments) => Added a "(More details) link" from the "Geography" section of the "{{Mars}}" template => to the newly created "{{Geography of Mars}}" template - as follows => "({ {small|[ [Template:Geography of Mars|More details]]}})" - maybe better? - and maybe no longer necessary to replace the present "{{Mars}}" template already added to various Mars-related articles with the new "{{Geography of Mars}}" template after all? - in any case - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 00:38, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2016-08-21T00:38:00.000Z","author":"Drbogdan","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Drbogdan-2016-08-21T00:38:00.000Z-Additional_comments","replies":[]}}-->
I have added an optional parameter which expands the selected group immediately. See Cerberus Fossae for an example. This makes it a bit easier to get back to the most closely related topic group. If anyone sees a problem with this, let me know. Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 14:16, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2020-12-22T14:16:00.000Z","author":"Pbsouthwood","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Pbsouthwood-2020-12-22T14:16:00.000Z-Select_group_for_priority_expansion_by_optional_parameter","replies":[],"displayName":"Peter Southwood"}}-->
I have also made the assumption that this template should be added to the pages which are listed in it, and intend to do so when I notice the lack. · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 14:27, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2020-12-22T14:27:00.000Z","author":"Pbsouthwood","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Pbsouthwood-2020-12-22T14:27:00.000Z-Select_group_for_priority_expansion_by_optional_parameter","replies":[],"displayName":"Peter Southwood"}}-->
|
|
.jpg){kind=small}
