Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Astronomy/Telescopes

listing telescopes
Is there an approved method for listing telescopes which used to be at an observatory? I just put the telescope at the bottom of the list and put "dismantled" at: Roque_de_los_Muchachos_Observatory -- does this seem ok? Rnt20 09:45, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

"Useful links"

 * * * * list of observatories
 * list of largest optical reflecting telescopes
 * list of optical telescopes -- incomplete
 * list of radio telescopes
 * observatory
 * space observatory
 * telescope
 * Timeline of artificial satellites and space probes
 * Complete list of the ~1000 astronomical catalogues, with links
 * 2MASS link to other surveys
 * List of radio telescopes
 * List of 1192 observatory locations
 * To view changes made in the last 24 hours to astronomy pages on Wikipedia click here

Older comments
I placed the telescope box under "proposed but not yet implemented" at Infobox, so please make sure that continues to have the newest form of the box, and is moved out of the "proposed" section once it is ready. I would suggest choosing a single unique color for the table (the colors that have already been chosen can be seen at Infobox). Apart from that, looks great! Tuf-Kat 18:04, Feb 16, 2004 (UTC)


 * I'd also suggest using a single color for all telescopes. And I'd suggest not using that pink in any case, since it's already ubiquitous with lifeforms and so many other categories. How about including date built? Elf 18:29, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)


 * So, if I understand this correctly, from Lick Observatory, there'd be links to several articles, one each for the Great Lick Refractor, the Shane Reflector, ect.; or would there be one box for each of the major telescopes, all on the observatory's article? Gentgeen 18:58, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)

How about this: For observatories we use color A and have a separate row for each major telescope (name, institutions running it, etc.). The telescope name links to the telescope page, where its table has a different header color B and the info currently listed here. Would we want a separate wikiproject page for observatories, or just have all the info on this page? I think a slightly different table for land and space telescopes, as the space tele's will have significantly different information--orbital parameters, servicing dates, deorbit date, weight, etc. I'm also not sure if "instruments" is really relevant for ground telescopes--they're changing all the time, and sometimes different observers bring their own instrument. It's certainly not newsworthy when a ground telescope gets a new detector. --zandperl 19:43, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)


 * OK, I've got the observatory box up at Lick Observatory, please go and comment. Gentgeen 02:55, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)


 * Lookin' good Gentgeen! I put in the coordinates of San Jose and the altitude in meters (rounded to the nearest hundred).  Do we want to keep the "equipment" section, or roll it all into the tabel?  Or should we remove that section of the table?  --zandperl 23:08, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)

TUF-KAT

Good idea. So far Lick Observatory is the only page with the box, but Spitzer Space Telescope also has a lot of what I was thinking of. --zandperl 23:08, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Would it be more appropriate to have the "observatory" box include all the info in the "telescope" box for when an observatory article discusses all the telescopes? See Palomar Observatory for a case where it seems it might be more appropriate that way. --zandperl 04:25, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)


 * The page talks about the observatory, the 200 in reflector, and the Star Survey, so you'd need 3 boxes on one page, wich might get a bit crowded. Gentgeen 17:30, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)


 * So you recommend just do one "observatory" box on that page? Meanwhile:

Hubble Space Telescope done. Yee-haw, I'm pumped! --zandperl 17:38, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Hubble looks good. I'm not sure what I recomend, really, I'm not an astronomer, I just see Lick everyday so I expanded the article about it, then I wrote the article about James Lick to fill an empty link from the observatory's article. Then I got hooked as a wikipedian. When I saw the wikiproject on telescopes I thought I'd help by putting the observatory box on the one page in that area I've delt with. I think I'll stop rambling now. Gentgeen 18:36, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)

For the space telescopes template, should I put power source (solar, nuclear, etc.) in the box? --zandperl 15:50, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Latest infobox version?
After a change by User:Maio at Arecibo Observatory, box text is now shrunken. Anyone have an opinion? --zandperl 00:03, 12 Mar 2004 (UTC)

"Deorbit date"
Space telescope infobox has a spot for "deorbit date"; I'm looking for another way to phrase that for telescopes like JWST that won't deorbit, but will cease to produce useful data. --zandperl 03:03, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * How about decommissioning? 'Cease of operations'? 'Last light' ;-)? EddEdmondson 08:45, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Template:Infobox_ground-based_telescope
I'm writing a template using the following Arecibo infobox as guide (stop me if it's done already, or if anyone has suggestions). -Wikibob | Talk 10:52, 2004 Nov 1 (UTC)

Here are the results; transcluding the template on the right, original on the left:

Sentence case
Can we try to use sentence case throughout please? Some infoboxes appear to use case inconsistently. Bobblewik (talk) 20:24, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * Do you mean case of nouns/adjectives, or are you talking about verbs? About the only place case shows in English is in pronouns, and I don't see much of that in the infoboxes. --John Owens (talk) 05:02, 2005 Mar 19 (UTC)


 * Examples of what I mean are 'Physical Characteristics' which should be 'Physical characteristics' and 'Focal Length' which should be 'Focal length'. Bobblewik (talk) 09:59, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * Ohhh, I thought you meant grammatical case, which I couldn't see meaning much here. If that's what you mean, I'm all behind you, then. --John Owens (talk) 10:00, 2005 Mar 19 (UTC)

Telescope HOWTO
I'm working on giving some of the pages more information of a practical, how-do-you-do-it nature. While I realize it isn't exactly what this WikiProject is for, if any of you want to pitch in, my first work in progress is temporarily at User:JohnOwens/Pet Projects/astrophotography. Just don't mind the rambling smart-ass remarks I've got in there temporarily while it's in progress. ;) Oh, and if/when I have further pages to work on, assuming they're fairly closely related to telescope use, would this be the best place to put them, or Wikipedia talk:Wikiportal/Astronomy, or somewhere else? --John Owens (talk) 05:02, 2005 Mar 19 (UTC)

Weather
Does anyone know how to find the (# of clear nights, humidity) the observatory box is asking for? Is there some centeral webpage or is it done observatory by observatory?--Rayc 22:13, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

baloon experiments?
Two requests:
 * could someone recategorize Category:Astronomical observatories? Most of these look to be optical observatories, but its hard to tell.
 * What is the differences? D--Rayc 17:11, 18 September 2005 (UTC)o you put radio observatories under the astronomical observatories section? We could make a sub-cats to Astronomical observatories Catergory:Optical Observatories, Catergory:Radio Observatories, etc...--Rayc 17:11, 18 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Could someone create a cat for CMB instruments? e.g. Category:CMB experiments? I could not figure out how to cat BOOMERanG experiment, which is a baloon-bourne experiment. I guess we need a Category:Baloon-based experiments for anything so lofted.

linas 03:43, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

What to Do with Arrays
Hey sorry if this is mentioned somewhere and I missed it, but what does this Wikiproject plan to do with arrayed telescopes like the VLBA? They're not quite surveys or plain old observatories... thanks. Andromeda321 01:05, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Improvement drive
Asteroid deflection strategies has been nominated on WP:IDRIVE. Support it with your vote if you want it to be improved.--Fenice 22:45, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Articles for the Wikipedia 1.0 project
Hi, I'm a member of the Version_1.0_Editorial_Team, which is looking to identify quality articles in Wikipedia for future publication on CD or paper. We recently began assessing using these criteria, and we are looking for A-class, B-class, and Good articles, with no POV or copyright problems. Can you recommend any suitable articles? Please post your suggestions here. Cheers, Walkerma 03:41, 7 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Not sure I entirely understand the scheme, but take a look at the following.
 * FA - Hubble Space Telescope
 * A - ?
 * B/Good - Spitzer Space Telescope, IRAS
 * --zandperl 00:46, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for these, I think you probably have the assessments about right, though the IRAS article seems very short. Please feel free to update this project's table as you find or improve articles. If you want to get a feel for the assessments, A-Class is roughly equivalent to GA, and you can also take a look at some neighboring projects' tables such as the Space missions table. Thanks, Walkerma 03:06, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Largest telescope
Here's an idea: include predecessor/successor boxes for "largest refracting telescope in the world," "largest reflecting telescope in the world," "largest radio telescope in the world," etc. where applicable. For example, the box at the end of the Yerkes Observatory might look like this:

This would create an interesting new way to browse through historical telescopes. A quick google search didn't turn up any pre-built listings on the web, but I'm sure the relevant information is out there somewhere, and it may even be reconstructible from the Wikipedia telescope pages. --Dantheox 16:24, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Updates needed

 * 1) I see above on this talk page that there's a more updated infobox, however it's not on the project page.
 * 2) Someone requested a link for "days clear per year," perhaps the Clear Sky Clock would do the trick?
 * 3) A lot has been done since I was last an active participant, someone want to go thru the history and/or talk page and update the History of the project section?
 * --zandperl 00:38, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Keplerian telescope
Could someone knowledgeable on the subject create an article on Keplerian telescopes, or at least add a definition as part of the optical telescope article?--ragesoss 22:46, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Project directory
Hello. The WikiProject Council has recently updated the WikiProject Council/Directory. This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the directory and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 23:31, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Stablepedia
Beginning cross-post.
 * See Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team. If you wish to comment, please comment there. ★ MESSED  ROCKER ★  03:30, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

''End cross-post. Please do not comment more in this section.''

Wikipedia Day Awards
Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 16:51, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

This WikiProject
I plan on merging WikiProject Telescopes into WikiProject Astronomy in a week's time, as it doesn't seem very active (apart from me), and it seems pointless to have it separate from the (not very busy anyway) Astronomy wikiproject. Please let me know if you have any objections to this. Thanks. Mike Peel 09:29, 7 January 2007 (UTC)