Wikipedia:WikiProject Astronomical objects/Collaboration
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| Project discussion |
|---|
 |
||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Space (coordinating) templates
|
||||||||||
The Astronomy Collaboration of the Week is a collaborative effort to improve Astronomy-related articles, in order to help them reach featured-article or good-article standards. Anyone, no matter what their level of knowledge about astronomy, is welcome to lend a hand. This topic is wide-ranging, from articles describing classes of objects, such as Comet, Asteroid, Globular cluster, or Galaxy, to articles describing astronomical concepts, like the Big Bang, to articles describing individual objects or locations in space, like Saturn, Io, or Valles Marineris on Mars.
| Collaborations |
|---|
|
Article Creation and |
| Arts & entertainment |
| Games & sports |
|
Football (soccer) |
| Geography & places |
| Government & politics |
| Religion |
|
Anglicanism |
| Science & technology |
|
Aviation |
| Miscellaneous |
|
|
Contents |
[edit] Goals
This Collaboration of the week is designed to improve articles with Astronomy-related topics to at least Good-article status, if not Featured-article status. Important to this effort is the improvement of references used in articles, both making sure statements are cited, and improving quality of citations, from web-based references, to preferably peer-reviewed ones. Secondly, the content of many articles need expanding, often to include more recent results. Finally, the language and grammar of articles can be improved.
These broad-based goals make collaboration necessary for broad or important topics. Even if an editor is not well-versed in the collaboration of the week's topic, they can still improve the article through copyedits or improving the style, for example.
[edit] Current Collaborations
- June 13-19: Mars
- June 20-26: Sunspot
- June 27-July 3: Titan (moon)
- July 4-July 10: Astronomy
- July 11-July 17: Milky Way
[edit] Selecting the next collaboration
The selection process involves two steps:
- Nomination: Every five weeks, Astronomy Collaboration of the Week will go through a nomination vote. A collaborator may nominate or vote for up to five articles (minus outstanding votes from the previous nomination vote) during each voting period. New nominations should be added at the end of the Candidates for collaboration section. Insightful comments may assist others in casting their vote. If an article is already nominated, you may a vote in support by adding ~~~~ under the relevant article's support section in Candidates for collaboration. Any registered Wikipedian can vote on this page, regardless of their level of knowledge about the subject.
- Selection: The top five are selected by approval voting; opposition votes have no bearing. The top vote getter will be the new Collaboration of the Week, while the second place article will be the next week's collaboration, and so forth. The votes for those articles failing to make it into the top five will be carried over to the next nomination stage.
[edit] Preparing the next collaboration
To change to a newly selected article, first close the previous one:
- Change the header on this page to reflect the change.
- Note the selection in the collaboration archive.
- If appropriate, the article should be referred to Peer review and later to Featured article candidates.
Now prepare the new article:
- Replace the old article with the new one on Current Astronomy Collaboration to announce the new selection on the top of this page and on the Wikiproject page.
- Contact the Wikipedians who voted for the winning article in their talk pages.
- Add {{Current Astronomy Collaboration2}} to the top of the COTW's article page. This expands to:
[edit] Nominating articles
|
===[[Article]]=== |
- First, decide if it is necessary for the article to require a collaboration. Minor grammatical errors and other simple tasks can be done by one person. Be bold!
- Preferably, articles should come from the Worklist, but any Astronomy-related topic is eligible for nomination.
- Add the nominee to the Candidates for collaboration section, and follow the following format:
- Make comment on COTW nomination on the article's talk page.
[edit] Candidates for collaboration
[edit] Sunspot
Reason: Has good size and content but needs to be fully referenced and some improvement in structure. Awolf002 21:18, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
- Support
- Comments
[edit] Mars
Reason: Interest in getting article to FA status --GW_Simulations|User Page | Talk | Contribs | E-mail 19:28, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
- Support
- GW_Simulations|User Page | Talk | Contribs | E-mail
- Support It is quite close, just a bit more work and it should be ready for FA status. Tuvas
- Comments
- This article seems to suffer from Summaritis. I don't know if this is simply because the English version has more sub-article, but the Spanish article, a Featured article in that language, has a much better lay out and looks like it would be easier to understand. --Volcanopele 19:55, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Titan (moon)
This article has quite a bit of info, but it feels haphazardly organized and only lightly touches on the discoveries made by Cassini with respect to its geology. Quite a bit of info from Huygens, but relatively little from Cassini's RADAR, VIMS, and ISS, in comparison. Finally, more referencing to published articles would be useful. Volcanopele 19:47, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
- Support
- Comments
- I think Tuvas has the right idea. The Portugese version (a featured article in that language), does seem to be better organized than this version. Not knowing Portugese, I can't be certain of the veracity of the info or its comprehensiveness, but the organization, plus a bit more added to the geology/surface section, is what I have in mind for the English-language article. --Volcanopele 20:09, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
- I can do a fair amount of translation, providing I have the time. I can tell you that from the little I read of the article, it does seem to be quite well laid out. Still, it would take quite a bit of time to just translate the entire article, maybe I'll translate the section headings or something and we could model ours after theirs? Tuvas 21:07, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Io (moon)
Reason: Former FA in need of additional info on volcanism and atmosphere. Foreign-language FA. Needs more peer-reviewed citations. --Volcanopele 16:19, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
- Support
- Comments
[edit] Triton (moon)
Reason: Needs sources and details on cryovolcanism and climate. --Volcanopele 16:19, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
- Support
- Comments
[edit] Star
Reason: A primary topic in Astronomy. There was a failed FA nomination and a few errors in the text. It could use an observation/theory history section, a little information on T Tauri stars, Herbig-Haro objects and variable stars, and plenty of references and citations. I think this page could easily be twice as long without running out of interesting material. Thanks! RJH (talk) 17:37, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
- Support
- Comments
[edit] User:Worldtraveller's suggested list
Adopting a slightly different approach as I suggested on the talk page, I'm going to list the five articles I'd most like to work on. If other people list 5 articles, then we can pick the first collaboration as the article that is selected by most people, take on the second-most selected one after that, and so on. That way, no article 'loses' by not being 'elected'.
- Astronomy - I think collaboration is the only way to tackle this article, which is poor at the moment.
- Solar System
- Milky Way
- Moon
- Venera program
[edit] Orbit (celestial mechanics)
Reason: This page was recently moved from Planetary orbit, and I think it could use some work, for being such an important (and well linked-to) article.. additionally, the various kinds of orbits (see orbit (disambiguation)), need a lot of cleaning up. Mlm42 12:54, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- Support
- Mlm42 12:54, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- Comments
