Wikipedia:Featured and good topic candidates/Solar System/addition7

Solar System (7th supplementary nomination)

 * 1) Makemake (dwarf planet)

A new body has been declared a dwarf planet and its article has been made a GA. I give to you Makemake. Zginder 2008-07-24T02:14Z (UTC)
 * Support - Not enough FA's, get Scattered disc and this one to FA!! :) You guys do awesome work, keep it up. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 05:09, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Support - It was amazing before, its amazing now. Just two more FAs! --haha169 (talk) 19:14, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose. There seems to be some cherrypicking going on here. Can someone explain why small Solar System body, interplanetary medium, timeline of solar system astronomy, timeline of Solar System exploration, attributes of the largest solar system bodies, geological features of the solar system, Solar System in fiction, table of planets and dwarf planets in the Solar System, timeline of discovery of Solar System planets and their moons, or stability of the Solar System isn't included? Also, wouldn't Moon, Io, Ganymede, Callisto, Titan, and Triton be better suited to Earth, Jupiter, Saturn and Neptune subtopics? I'm sorry, but this is far from featured-worthy. Xnux   the   Echidna  04:41, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Cherrypicking or not, this topic's scope was decided months ago, and includes all dwarf planets. Makemake is a dwarf planet, and so, by definition, has to go into this topic. There really isn't a need to discuss this, as far as I'm concerned. The big seven moons were included in the topic because they were all larger than Pluto and Eris, and so were deemed worthy of inclusion if Pluto and Eris were. This topic expands its scope in incremental lots. First the planets and dwarf planets, then the minor planet populations, then the major moons, then formation. None of your listed articles are barred from possible future inclusion, but would need massive amounts of work done on them before they are ready. Serendi pod ous  06:18, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * So, is this topic purposely not including these articles? Also, when Earth, Jupiter, Saturn, and Neptune become subtopics, will the moons listed here be included in their respective subtopics or not? Xnux   the   Echidna  13:25, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * A topic's scope must be well defined, but that that does not mean that every single article about the topic be included. Almost every article on Wikipedia has to do with a topic in the solar system; however, I do not think that anyone would argue that we need ever BLP in this topic because that all of them live on Earth. Zginder 2008-07-25T13:50Z (UTC)
 * ...That wasn't what I meant. Obviously, we aren't putting in every article where the Solar System is the setting. However, for some reason, we aren't putting articles that discuss the Solar System specifically. Why? Also, you didn't answer my question about later putting the large moons on different subtopics. Xnux   the   Echidna  17:03, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I like to think of Featured Topics as sentences- with the idea being that if you can't write out the topic in a sentence without torturing it, you don't have a topic. This topic, therefore, is "Major bodies of the solar system, including the sun, planets, dwarf planets, and the large moons." (where there is a clear division between the large moons and the not-large moons).  It's fairly well defined, and there's no rule that says that articles can't be non-head articles in more than one topic- after all, if I did a topic "largest cities in the US", it'd have NYC in there an article, and if I also did a "major cities of New York" topic, NYC would also be there, and still not as the head article. --PresN (talk) 18:24, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * The opic is not, however, "Major bodies of the solar system including blahblahblah as well as the notable attributes of the solar system." It's a perfectly valid topic- it's just not this topic. --PresN (talk) 18:28, 25 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Support. --PresN (talk) 18:25, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Were it not for Formation and evolution of the Solar System, we would be able to just call this "major bodies of the solar system" and everything would fit. When we get around to having a big talk on whether to allow overview topics, it will have a big impact of this topic.  However, that change has nothing to do with this nomination.  If some dwarf planets belong, then they all do. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 22:37, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * For the record, this topic isn't excluding anything. But there are only a few of us and we are working flat out as it is. I was planning to include Timeline of discovery of Solar System planets and their moons and Planets beyond Neptune alongside Makemake in this expansion, but was beaten to the post before "...Beyond Neptune"'s FAC was finished.  Serendi pod ous  22:46, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Planets beyond Neptune has reached FA. Do you think it could be added as well? I was also intending to include Timeline of discovery of Solar System planets and their moons in this expansion.  Serendi pod ous  10:00, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Support - If one dwarf planet deserves to be in then they all do. Rreagan007 (talk) 00:03, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Support - Hopefully scattered disc will become an FA soon. But seriously, the only ones that do any work are Ruslik, Serendi, Marskell used to, and Ling who's new to it plus other people who i don't know as well... I do just a little bit of the work. I need to get on the job guys! -- Meldshal   (§peak to me)  14:01, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Note to all - Let's keep this nomination about the new dwarf planet. If you want to add other articles later, discuss it and do a separate nomination, because otherwise adding new articles at this point will just nullify all discussion to this point. Let's just add this new one, and those interested can formulate another addition later. Sound good? Judgesurreal777 (talk) 05:08, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Support - I respectfully disagree Judge, I think we should start a new vote with the two other articles included immediately, this will be the fastest way to get all 3 articles into the topic and will result in the least work overall - rst20xx (talk) 09:59, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Let us keep the nomination as it stands because, I for one might have some problems with the other two. Zginder 2008-07-31T12:25Z (UTC)
 * Clarification I do not know if I would support the addition of the two additional articles. I would need to do more research and a good argument would help. My point is that Makemake is an easy nomination and the other two are not. Zginder 2008-07-31T19:42Z (UTC)
 * OK, fine, that's fair enough then. I really didn't think my last post through, I think it's mainly because I'm slightly frustrated because the main contributors probably should have been the ones to nominate in the first place - rst20xx (talk) 22:27, 31 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Support -- Admrb♉ltz (t • c • [ log]) 00:22, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Support Pretty much falls directly into the scope of the topic as much as any other article does. When overview topics have improved then I would support the continued expansion of the scope of this topic and also a spin off in the form of "Major bodies of the solar system". To do this now would be a little silly and repetitive in my opinion. Sillyfolkboy (talk) 04:00, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Close with promotion - This supplementary nomination is for the addition of an article, a move which has got unanimous approval. The only oppose vote seems to have issue not with this addition, but with the topic as it currently stands, and any such opposition should not be brought here but instead by bringing the topic to WP:FTR - rst20xx (talk) 01:22, 6 August 2008 (UTC)