Talk:Planetary geology

Requested Move
Astrogeology → Planetary Geology

The term "astrogeology" is an outdated term that hasn't been in common use since the Apollo lunar exploration era. Those of us in the field refer to ourselves as planetary geologists, not astrogeologists, probably because we study planets and not stars.IntrplnetSarah 20:04, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Survey
Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with  ~


 * Support - Planetary Geology is the academically accepted term. IntrplnetSarah 20:04, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Support - I agree, Planetary geology is the accepted (and more accurate) term. Milkysa 15:57, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Support - I agree with InterplnetSarah; Even in the literature, it has been decades since planetary geology was refered to as "Astrogeology". Astrobette 16:11, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Support - NASA, which is the leading entity of this field, has a research grant prgram called "Planetary Geology and Geophysics". Also, "planetary geology" implicitly includes Earth geology, while "astrogeology" probably doesn't.  I don't think it's sound to exclude the Earth from geology of solar system bodies. --Takihiroi 03:29, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Support Jay32183 19:14, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Support - although redirects should include the term "Astrogeology" --Denstat 14:16, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Support ASAP, and allow the word 'astrogeology' to a propper redirect.BatteryIncluded (talk) 15:50, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Discussion
Add any additional comments


 * I'm a planetary geologist and have been for quite some time, and I've never once heard the field referred to as "astrogeology". Within the planetary science community, we all call it "planetary geology" - probably because we study planets, and not stars, as "astro" implies.  Could we flipflop the page and the redirect? IntrplnetSarah 14:58, 22 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm no expert, but the USGS calls it 'astrogeology' - are they important in the field? The Singing Badger 00:10, 23 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Wow, look at that. No, the USGS is not really very involved in planetary stuff anymore, not since the Apollo days. Maybe "astrogeology" vs "planetary geology" is like Beta vs VHS, USGS used astrogeology and NASA used planetary geology and when the Moon dust settled, NASA won, but USGS won't let go? Just speculating. IntrplnetSarah 14:07, 23 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Also, I just noticed that the category it falls under is "planetary geology". IntrplnetSarah 19:28, 21 June 2006 (UTC)


 * The correction and move sound excellent, so long as the previous term is retained somewhere in the article as an alternate name, or search term (so USGS can find it and all). At school we had a course called Interplanetary Geology -- is that term at all accurate in the field, so would it rate a mention, perhaps also as a search term? -- Denstat 15:37, 27 June 2006 (UTC)


 * I've never heard anyone use "Interplanetary Geology", but if you want to add a redirect, it probably wouldn't hurt. IntrplnetSarah 18:48, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
 * My online research suggests that it is still used occasionally as a popular term, which surprised me, but it shows up in media articles and once on a National Parks Service document about NASA training courses. I'll add a redirect for now, to bring people to the proper term. -- Denstat 18:46, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

The "Geo" in Geology
This is mostly a curiosity, but I've wondered for a while why the term Geo is used in a term to describe something on non-Earth planets. I've always associated it with things that specifically relate to Earth. I think is correct, but I won't complain if someone corrects me. It seems that Planetary geology is already an established name for studying rocks on non-Earth bodies, but I wonder if there's room for an explanation in the article of where the name came from, and noting that it's technically incorrect. Is this just an inaccurate re-application of the word Geology, or is there another reason? Izogi 23:37, 23 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Some scientists talk about 'areology' on Mars, or 'selenology' on the Moon. But realistically, there are so many solar system bodies that it would rapidly become absurd: Hadeology on Pluto, perhaps? Mimeology on Mimas? And what ~would you do with something like 2309 Mr. Spock? I imagine most scientists involved in this science simply regard geology as the study of rocks, not of the earth. The Singing Badger 00:22, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the response. If anything, I would have thought the logical thing to do might be to create a new term that encompasses rock study on any solar system body rather than simply re-assign a prefix that's used to mean Earth-centric in many other forms besides geology.  As far as text in the article is concerned, would it be reasonable to include something like:
 * "Although the geo prefix typically indicates topics of or relating to the Earth, planetary geology is named as such for historical and convenience reasons. Due to the types of investigations involved, it is also closely linked with Earth-based geology."
 * Izogi 01:57, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

That's great, definitely add it in. The Singing Badger 02:34, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Remove Barringer crater from this article
I somehow think that the information about the Barringer crater visitor center should be removed. It doesn't seem central to the topic of planetary geology. Besides the visitor center is also described in the Meteor crater article. It anyway seems difficult to justify such a short article not to be merged with the Planetary science article. --Tobias1984 (talk) 21:25, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Planetary Feature Suggestion
Having just seen the latest map of the informal names which are being given to leatures on Pluto, I think it would be good to have a definition of the different types, such as: Caves, Colles, Crater, Dorsa, Fossa, Linea, Macula, Mare, Montes, Planum, Regio, Rilles, Rupes, Terra, Vallis, etc. I know that 'Crater' is fairly obvious, but the basic meaning of the other terms should perhaps be included on this page, rather than on the individual planet/moon pages.

Murfas (talk) 15:49, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Good call. Table found elsewhere; inserted; added lead-in text. Feels like it unbalances the article right now, but only because this thing is in DESPERATE need of further loving expansion! DanHobley (talk) 06:02, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Lobus ...
... is missing. --Gereon K. (talk) 09:34, 13 October 2023 (UTC)