User talk:Urhixidur

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

1 Asteroid name lists
2 AfD nomination of List of asteroids/7201–7300
3 Mass of Nereid
4 Audrey C. Delsanti
5 Odd edit
6 ONL
7 Asteroid family
8 Speedy deletion of Template:Units of pressure
9 Meanings of asteroid names (176001-177000)
10 Meanings of asteroid names (177001-178000)
11 Meanings of asteroid names (178001-179000)
12 User Category for Discussion
13 List of Mercury-crossing asteroids
14 Proposed deletion of List of Mercury-crossing asteroids

[edit] Asteroid name lists

I'm not sure you're the right person to ask, but the histories and your talk says "maybe". On Meanings of asteroid names (9501-10000), 9993 Kumamoto's entry (as an example) has an asterisk but no explanation of what that asterisk signifies. What's the deal? Is it related to why the name origin isn't included? Cheers, Wily D 23:08, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes. Originally, the "Meanings of..." pages were filled out with the caveat that "Those meanings marked with an asterisk (*) are guesswork". But editors kept forgetting to include the asterisk when trying to be helpful, so I eventually changed the foreword header to what it reads now ("Meanings that do not quote a reference (the "†" links) are tentative."). The remaining asterisks should go away as they are replaced by citations, something which is increasingly possible as the {{MPCit_JPL}} database fills out. Urhixidur (talk) 02:49, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh, okay alright. I found the MPC offered the naming citations online, but I couldn't figure out how to link to them (it's accessable via some forms or such, so no url I could get). I was just wondering how some but not all ended up filled out. Thanks. Wily D 04:52, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Take a look at {{MPCit_MPES}}, which used to link directly to the result of the query form you mention, until the MPC changed the server's code to disallow it. As I explain on the template's pages, I asked them nicely about it, and never even got an acknowledgement of my request. Urhixidur (talk) 15:31, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, sorry, I don't really know anyone at the MPC, so I'm not sure I can beg a favour. Wily D 19:25, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of List of asteroids/7201–7300

An editor has nominated List of asteroids/7201–7300, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of asteroids/7201–7300 and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 11:59, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mass of Nereid

Hello Urhixidur. I noticed that at 14:28, 19 August 2004 you changed the mass of Nereid from unknown to 3.1×10¹⁹ kg. Was that a Back-of-the-envelope calculation or do you recall the source of the statement? Thanks, -- Kheider (talk) 22:13, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

The neptunian moon masses I got from JPL (http://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/?sat_phys_par). Take the GM value (2.06 km³/s²), divide by G (6.67259×10⁻²⁰ km³/kg s²). I guess the reference should be added in. Urhixidur (talk) 14:14, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

There, done. I also revised the values to make them self-consistent, and corrected the mistaken statement about the eccentricity. Urhixidur (talk) 14:35, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Actually I removed the statement about Bestla (moon). According to "Jacobson, R.A. (2007) SAT270, SAT271" Bestla only has an eccentricity of 0.5176 even though early observations in 2005 showed otherwise. Do you know of a newer/better source? -- Kheider (talk) 17:59, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Your JPL reference for the density is kind of dated since it lists inaccurate information for the estimated diameters and thus masses of the outer irregular moons of Uranus. I also notice that they assume that the density of the inner moons of Uranus and Neptune are 1.3 and all outer moons are 1.5. Even large Proteus (moon) is treated as having a density of 1.3. -- Kheider (talk) 17:59, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Part of the problem is the Kozai mechanism, which means an outer satellite's eccentricity will change over time. The mean elements from JPL do indicate a lower e, but if you get the current ephemerides from the [IAU-MPC Natural Satellites Ephemeris Service http://scully.harvard.edu/~cgi/natsats], you'll get an Epoch 2007 Apr. 10.0 TT (JDT 2454200.5) e of 0.7309460 (the same source gives Nereid's e 0.7464083 as for Epoch 2007 Oct. 27.0 TT (JDT 2454400.5) to JPL's 0.7512). I guess the article needs to be better qualified. As for JPL's physical parameters, I would have the same question, although I'd tend to trust JPL's SSD group: they're the guys who actually "drive" the probes. Urhixidur (talk) 15:21, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

I like JPL's SSD site, I just don't think they are paid to keep updating (uncertain) estimates in the diameter, density, and thus mass of the outer irregular moons. I find it funny that JPL-SSD lists Sycorax as having a diameter of 190km with an albedo of 0.07 and Scott S. Sheppard lists Sycorax having a diameter of 150km with an albedo of 0.04. You would expect the higher albedo to be the smaller estimated diameter. But do keep in mind that SSD is using data from 2001 (diameter) and 1998 (albedo) while Sheppard is using data from 2003. -- Kheider (talk) 20:52, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Audrey C. Delsanti

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Audrey C. Delsanti, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Audrey C. Delsanti. Scog (talk) 10:42, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Odd edit

I noticed this edit of yours and was wondering about the formatting of the JPL Small-Body Database Browser page title - they don't use subscripts, which I've followed faithfully in all my cites to them - is this an oversight on my part or yours? Wily D 20:26, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Provisional designations are properly written in sub-scripted fashion. The JPL pages just take the ASCII shortcut. They are also pretty unreliable as far as diacriticals go (the Russian IPA pages are much better in this respect). This Schmadel page shows proper TeX notation for the minor planet names: you'll see there the sub-scripts and the diacriticals faithfully represented. Urhixidur (talk) 20:38, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Err, I agree that they're properly written in subscript, but I'm not convinced the title of the JPL webpage should also be written with the subscript. Wily D 20:41, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I see what you're getting at now. Well, HTML pages, by their nature, will never have super- or sub-scripts in their titles, but this is a technical limitation, not a designer choice. It just looks odd to me to have the object's name properly subscripted everywhere except in the title of an external link. It's an editorial choice. Urhixidur (talk) 20:45, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Hmm ... it might be worth having a consistant standard - I've been writing a lot of minor planet articles of late, all of which cite the JPL small-body browser - either way, a consistent standard across all articles seems sensible. Cheers, Wily D 20:50, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

I hope you're using the AstOrb Browser to generate the infoboxes: it is a real time-saver. Urhixidur (talk) 20:53, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

No, I'd never heard of such a thing, but looking I see that it's written for windows, which is probably the third most common OS for me to be using while I'm editing - it's not a big deal to copy/paste the relevant values, anyhow. Some of the first ones I did are more poorly formatted - I've been meaning to go over them once I got down to 9901. Wily D 20:58, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, it would be nice if I could find the time to redo it in Java... Urhixidur (talk) 21:01, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

I'd be happy to look at your source if you like - are you getting data real-time from their server, or just using a downloaded database? Wily D 21:15, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

It uses a locally-downloaded file, astorb.dat, which is regularly updated (nearly daily). The main server is the Lowell Observatory (ftp://ftp.lowell.edu/pub/elgb/), but there is a mirror of sorts at the Université de Strasbourg (http://vizier.u-strasbg.fr/viz-bin/ftp-index?B/astorb). I say "of sorts" because the latter copy of astorb.dat has a slightly different format. AstOrb Browser detects the variant and can handle either one. As the user browses, the applet simply jumps about the file using Seek, since the file is essentially a long array of fixed-width records. A subsidiary ASCII file (which I maintain on my personal web site) provides the diacriticals for the names in TeX notation.

It is written in Delphi. Want to take a look at it? The PDF user's guide that comes with the download should tell you all about the expected behaviour. Urhixidur (talk) 21:21, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Delphi? Shit, it's been about ten years since I've written any Delphi code - but sure, I'll look if you're inclined to provide me with code. Wily D 21:28, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] ONL

Another editor has added the {{prod}} template to the article ONL, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 17:01, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Asteroid family

Zappala et al. '95 lists (9935) 1986 CP1 as belonging to the 1982 qg family. Now 1982 QG has since been renamed 6539 Nohavica. Do you think it makes more sense to list 1986 CP1 in Category:Nohavica asteroids or Category:1982 QG asteroids? I haven't found any more recent references ... Wily D 15:51, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

I'd put it in Category:Nohavica asteroids, make Category:1982 QG asteroids a redirect to Category:Nohavica asteroids, and mention on the Nohavica category page that the Zappalà paper called it "1982 QG" and why. Urhixidur (talk) 18:51, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

There, all done. Urhixidur (talk) 18:56, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, golly-gee, thanks. Wily D 19:17, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion of Template:Units of pressure

A tag has been placed on Template:Units of pressure requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{transclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:27, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

It is replaced by Template:Pressure Units, so there is no loss. Urhixidur (talk) 12:57, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Meanings of asteroid names (176001-177000)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Meanings of asteroid names (176001-177000), and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: Meanings of asteroid names (119001-120000). It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 04:25, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Meanings of asteroid names (177001-178000)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Meanings of asteroid names (177001-178000), and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: Meanings of asteroid names (119001-120000). It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.

[edit] Meanings of asteroid names (178001-179000)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Meanings of asteroid names (178001-179000), and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: Meanings of asteroid names (119001-120000). It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.

[edit] User Category for Discussion

A category created by you or to which you have significantly contributed is being considered for deletion, rename, move or merge in accordance with Wikipedia's Categories for Discussion policies . This does not mean that any of the userpages in the category will be deleted. They may, however, be recategorized.
Please share your thoughts on the matter at this category's entry on the User categories for discussion page.
VegaDark (talk) 02:02, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

The correct link now is Wikipedia:User_categories_for_discussion/Archive/March_2008#Category:User_tsolyáni Urhixidur (talk) 11:47, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] List of Mercury-crossing asteroids

Hello. Wikipedia:Unreferenced articles needs your help. List of Mercury-crossing asteroids has been without any references since June, 2006. Could you please take a minute out of your busy day to help add sources? Thanks for your time. Viriditas (talk) 22:59, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed deletion of List of Mercury-crossing asteroids

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article List of Mercury-crossing asteroids, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Jeepday (talk) 19:03, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

See also ebooksgratis.com: no banners, no cookies, totally FREE.