This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
This article is a big ugly list of stories and movies, and it seriously needs revision into sections with actual content and history. I may be able to get to this soon, but if someone else is motivated, please write! — ZorkFox 03:45, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
Moving Mars was incorrectly listed as being published in 1973. I corrected the date to 1993 and moved it to the appropriate place chronologically. — jonnygoldstein 16:04, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
can we add something related to Transformers the 2007 movie?? watched that scene? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.230.11.247 ( talk) 05:22, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
santa claus conquers the martians- one of the worst films ever. Despite the fact that I am laughing uncotrollably, isnt "one of the worst films ever" uncyclopaedic?? Of course I cant do a movie review because havent seen it. P.S. tell NASA the santa can transport their new mars probe :-) T.Neo 16:09, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
Image:Flash gordoncomic.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 23:16, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps the most read book of Martians after War of the Worlds, missing... please add it, thanks. ---Ransom (-- 71.4.51.150 ( talk) 22:34, 17 January 2008 (UTC))
This page needs a reference to the paper manga and animes series / OAV "Aria" (Aria the animation, Aria the Natural, Aria the Origination, Arietta). Takes place in a future where Mars has been terraformed and mainly flooded , and focuses on slices of life of a young gondola rower in a rebuild venice. -- 212.27.60.48 ( talk) 19:24, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
This article needs the B-Class checklist filled in to remain a B-Class article for the Comics WikiProject. If the checklist is not filled in by 7th August this article will be re-assessed as C-Class. The checklist should be filled out referencing the guidance given at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment/B-Class criteria. For further details please contact the Comics WikiProject. Comics-awb ( talk) 17:04, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
The image Image:Marvinthemartain.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. -- 01:59, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
A new bullet was just added to the Computer and video games section. While I don't disagree with the addition, I wasn't clear reading the text whether the god or the planet was referred to.
Then it dawned on me that the article really never seems to specifically state the subject (planet or god) (unless I missed it), particularly in the title, and it could be misconstrued. You kinda' have to skim the whole article to realize it's about the planet not the god.
Then again, why not the god as well? I suggest that at least we either make the subject clear in the lead paragraph that the article is about the planet not the god, or add a section for 'Mars the god' in the article. The article may need to be re-named, since there could actually be lots of references to the god, not the planet, and the article is already a bit long for comfort as it is. — Aladdin Sane ( talk) 17:58, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
The unreferenced template does not belong here. The books are references for themselves. If no one objects, I will remove it. -- Fartherred ( talk) 19:25, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
Shouldn't the immensely popular BBC serial "Journey into Space" be added to the radio list? AT Kunene ( talk) 18:10, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
There are a number of movies about Mars, some quite famous, that could be added. e.g.
"Conquest of Space" "Rocketship XM" "IT! The Terror from Space"
comment added by 2601:C:8B80:59C:946C:983D:9B13:E204 ( talk) 02:12, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Mars in fiction. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 18:48, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Mars in fiction. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 00:56, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
Mars (Doctor Who) appears to be little more than fancruft. If this article has any useful content, then it belongs here. ― Susmuffin Talk 08:28, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
Support: I agree, having a separate article for Mars in one show (albeit a notable show) is not necessary at all. Nice catch, I would never have noticed this in the sea of wikipedia articles. Good job. Ghinga7 ( talk) 17:40, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
Think we can get this to GA in the foreseeable future? I'd be happy to help. Ping User:TompaDompa. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:09, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Benji man ( talk · contribs) 14:39, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
Good Article review progress box
|
Sorry this review took so long -- great article! The thoroughness of the referencing is deeply impressive. Pass! Benji man ( talk) 15:48, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
Phobos and Deimos in fiction has a small introductory paragraph with proper references, and then loads of unreferenced references to videogames, novels, TV series and similar. I propose to merge the little that deserves merging into this article, and then redirect it here. There's no need to set apart Mars and its moons when talking about their impact in fiction. Cambalachero ( talk) 13:50, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was: promoted by
Bruxton (
talk)
18:36, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
Swift writes that the astronomy-loving Laputians had discovered 'two lesser stars, or satellites, which revolve about Mars', which raced around the planet in 10 hours and 21.5 hours respectively. Gulliver's Travels was written in 1726, over 150 years before the discovery of Mars's moons, Phobos and Deimos.( 4th Rock from the Sun: The Story of Mars)
Improved to Good Article status by TompaDompa ( talk). Self-nominated at 04:16, 11 December 2022 (UTC).
General: Article is new enough and long enough |
---|
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
---|
|
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation |
---|
|
QPQ: Done. |
Overall: @ TompaDompa: Good article. Hook is interesting, article is sourced, and the QPQ is done. Onegreatjoke ( talk) 17:22, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
Should the see also template be at the top or in a See Also section at the bottom? ✶Mitch 199811✶ 02:45, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
It is somewhat inexplicable that this article states in a couple of places that Klaatu from the 1951 science fiction film is a Martian. This isn't obvious on viewing the film, and it isn't mentioned in any of the related Wikipedia articles. Is this some sort of headcanon? Pharos ( talk) 16:59, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
when Klaatu of the original The Day the Earth Stood Still (1951) twice asserted his journey to Earth had taken 250,000,000 miles, and that his planet and Earth were "neighbors," he effectively communicated that Mars was his home planet, since Mars is the only known planet that is ever 250,000,000 miles from Earth (when the planets are in opposition).TompaDompa ( talk) 19:22, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
I'm sorry for bugging you again but I want to mention that Divine Comedy mentions Mars in the Paradiso. It is a location where men who died for Christianity exist(?). ✶Mitch 199811✶ 16:11, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
The redirect Mars (Doctor Who) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 June 21 § Mars (Doctor Who) until a consensus is reached. QuicoleJR ( talk) 18:56, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
The redirect Pomang has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 July 3 § Pomang until a consensus is reached. CycloneYoris talk! 23:11, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
The redirect Martian Congressional Republic. has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 4 § Martian Congressional Republic. until a consensus is reached. TompaDompa ( talk) 22:47, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
@ Patar knight, Mike Christie, and Cambalachero: The short description has been changed thrice in short order, from "none" to "Depictions of the planet" to "Fictional depictions of the planet" and back to "none". I rather agree with the rationale for "none", personally. "Mars in fiction" clearly defines the topic and needs no further clarification. The only possible point of confusion is if somebody thinks it refers to some other " Mars" (e.g. the deity or candy bar) than the planet, but it is implausible that such an article would be at the title "Mars in fiction" in much the same way as it would be implausible for any article about London, Ontario to be at a X in/of London title (which means that articles at such titles don't need to clarify that they are about London). Previous discussion can be found at Talk:Pluto in fiction#Short description. TompaDompa ( talk) 13:11, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
Seems odd for a featured article to contain so many 'links' to pages that don't exist. 51.52.43.171 ( talk) 11:50, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
Note as well that, if short stories do not have independent notability, we can always link instead to a section of an article or list that discusses it, turning it blue for the time being. Redirects with potential to become standalone articles may still be listed at Wikipedia:Requested articles/Arts and entertainment/Literature and Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/ArticlesNeeded. Cambalachero ( talk) 18:30, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
In my understanding, "the 1900s" would refer to the decade of 1900–1909, but in this article it appears to be used to mean the 20th century instead, and likewise for other centuries. Is this an established convention in the relevant field? Otherwise, I don't see why the article should refer to year periods in such a confusing way. -- Paul_012 ( talk) 02:48, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
In my understanding, "the 1900s" would refer to the decade of 1900–1909, but in this article it appears to be used to mean the 20th centuryseems to be a case of an editor used to one convention coming across another that they are not familiar with. As opposed to the text itself being problematic in terms of ambiguity. TompaDompa ( talk) 05:16, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
I do think the current usage is ambiguous and in contravention of the MOS's instruction "When using forms such as the 1900s, ensure there is no ambiguity as to whether the century or just its first decade is meant." For example,
The common-sense reading of the MOS is that any ambiguity must be addressed immediately when the reader encounters the '00s form, if not before, and especially not several paragraphs later, forcing them to backtrack and wasting their time. I hope I've demonstrated clearly enough why the current writing is far from optimal.
Also, as an aside, the article refers to "... the late 1800s [i.e. late 19th century] as it became clear that the Moon was devoid of life", but does not explain what scientific discoveries were made during this period that led to this knowledge. This is something that should be briefly explained and linked to. -- Paul_012 ( talk) 15:16, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
and I would also consider combining "1960s" with "20th century" mixing schemesSorry but that's just absurdly illogical. But all this isn't really relevant to the main issue: Since there seems to be preference for retaining the 1900s format, proper context needs to be provided to ensure there is no ambiguity, as required by the MOS. I've provided examples and explained how it's ambiguous to some readers. More reason-based arguments to the contrary would be appreciated, rather than plain statements of opinion
The common-sense reading of the MOS is that any ambiguity must be addressed immediately), I don't find the specific instances to have any problematic ambiguity—the consistency alone does a lot to help, and "mid-1600s" gets proper context by the year 1656, for instance. The readings of the "XX00s" as decades all come across as rather nonsensical, really—it seems like intentionally trying to misunderstand the text. TompaDompa ( talk) 20:31, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
XavierItzm, sources on Mars in fiction do not consider The Expanse to be an important WP:ASPECT of how Mars and its moons have been depicted in fiction. You might notice that the examples in this article otherwise come from high-quality sources specifically on the topic of Mars in fiction such as Imagining Mars: A Literary History, the "Mars" entry in The Encyclopedia of Science Fiction, and so on. You added The Expanse with much lower-quality sources that are not specifically on the subject of Mars in fiction, namely IGN and Syfy articles on The Expanse. This article is a WP:Featured article because it reflects the contents of high-quality sources on the topic of the article according to WP:PROPORTION. The Expanse does not belong unless you can point to some sources on the overarching topic that actually cover this topic. See also e.g. MOS:POPCULT and WP:NOTTVTROPES. TompaDompa ( talk) 04:06, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
each aspect with a weight proportional to its treatment in the body of reliable, published material on the subjectper WP:PROPORTION, and this simply doesn't belong with the level of sourcing you have provided. Feel free to add more comments later; in the meantime, I will remove the mention of The Expanse to maintain the quality of this WP:Featured article while it is on the main page. TompaDompa ( talk) 04:30, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
each aspect with a weight proportional to its treatment in the body of reliable, published material on the subject—"on the subject" being the key phrase. Mars in fiction is a WP:Featured article because it meets the WP:Featured article criteria, one of which is that the article
is a thorough and representative survey of the relevant literature. Part of being a representative survey of the relevant literature is of course giving the same relative weight to various aspects as the relevant literature does. This balance was discussed at some length during the WP:FAC, which you can read at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Mars in fiction/archive1 if you are interested. As science fiction scholar Gary Westfahl notes, there are thousands upon thousands of potentially relevant titles. Obviously, we cannot (and should not want to) include all of them in an article like this. So how do we decide which ones to include? We look at how the sources on the overarching topic— Mars in fiction—treat the subject.If anyone is escalating here, it's you—you made a WP:BOLD edit and were reverted, and rather than discussing the matter you reinstated your reverted edit. TompaDompa ( talk) 05:05, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
In
James S. A. Corey's
The Expanse (2017), Deimos is destroyed through military action by Earth's government.
[1]
[2]
[3]
substantive and lasting"—it sounds kind of like length (or maybe budget), but those are both clearly not appropriate. I think we'll quickly run back into the problem that any system is subjective; we need to go by sources. Sources that say Mars (or Deimos) is in the Expanse, or even central to its plot, don't indicate if something has had a substantive and lasting impact on fiction in Mars. They only contribute to a TV Tropes style listing every appearance of Mars in fiction, which is exactly the wrong way to go for an article like this.
It resonates with Red Mars and the SpaceX program, and Amazon Prime's The Expanse series in which Mars has become an independent military power and is on the brink of war with Earth over rising tensions of nationalism and resources.). Dylnuge ( Talk • Edits) 14:59, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
Turns out that while The Expanse is not covered by sources on the topic as such, the first novel Leviathan Wakes is (albeit neither frequently nor extensively), so I've added a brief mention that also covers that it was the first in a series that later had a television adaptation. This solution should hopefully be satisfactory to everyone. TompaDompa ( talk) 03:06, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
References
Earth blowing up Mars' moon, Deimos
we see the destruction of Deimos
Earth destroys the small Martian moon of Deimos (appropriately named after the Greek god of terror)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
This article is a big ugly list of stories and movies, and it seriously needs revision into sections with actual content and history. I may be able to get to this soon, but if someone else is motivated, please write! — ZorkFox 03:45, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
Moving Mars was incorrectly listed as being published in 1973. I corrected the date to 1993 and moved it to the appropriate place chronologically. — jonnygoldstein 16:04, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
can we add something related to Transformers the 2007 movie?? watched that scene? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.230.11.247 ( talk) 05:22, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
santa claus conquers the martians- one of the worst films ever. Despite the fact that I am laughing uncotrollably, isnt "one of the worst films ever" uncyclopaedic?? Of course I cant do a movie review because havent seen it. P.S. tell NASA the santa can transport their new mars probe :-) T.Neo 16:09, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
Image:Flash gordoncomic.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 23:16, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps the most read book of Martians after War of the Worlds, missing... please add it, thanks. ---Ransom (-- 71.4.51.150 ( talk) 22:34, 17 January 2008 (UTC))
This page needs a reference to the paper manga and animes series / OAV "Aria" (Aria the animation, Aria the Natural, Aria the Origination, Arietta). Takes place in a future where Mars has been terraformed and mainly flooded , and focuses on slices of life of a young gondola rower in a rebuild venice. -- 212.27.60.48 ( talk) 19:24, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
This article needs the B-Class checklist filled in to remain a B-Class article for the Comics WikiProject. If the checklist is not filled in by 7th August this article will be re-assessed as C-Class. The checklist should be filled out referencing the guidance given at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment/B-Class criteria. For further details please contact the Comics WikiProject. Comics-awb ( talk) 17:04, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
The image Image:Marvinthemartain.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. -- 01:59, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
A new bullet was just added to the Computer and video games section. While I don't disagree with the addition, I wasn't clear reading the text whether the god or the planet was referred to.
Then it dawned on me that the article really never seems to specifically state the subject (planet or god) (unless I missed it), particularly in the title, and it could be misconstrued. You kinda' have to skim the whole article to realize it's about the planet not the god.
Then again, why not the god as well? I suggest that at least we either make the subject clear in the lead paragraph that the article is about the planet not the god, or add a section for 'Mars the god' in the article. The article may need to be re-named, since there could actually be lots of references to the god, not the planet, and the article is already a bit long for comfort as it is. — Aladdin Sane ( talk) 17:58, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
The unreferenced template does not belong here. The books are references for themselves. If no one objects, I will remove it. -- Fartherred ( talk) 19:25, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
Shouldn't the immensely popular BBC serial "Journey into Space" be added to the radio list? AT Kunene ( talk) 18:10, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
There are a number of movies about Mars, some quite famous, that could be added. e.g.
"Conquest of Space" "Rocketship XM" "IT! The Terror from Space"
comment added by 2601:C:8B80:59C:946C:983D:9B13:E204 ( talk) 02:12, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Mars in fiction. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 18:48, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Mars in fiction. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 00:56, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
Mars (Doctor Who) appears to be little more than fancruft. If this article has any useful content, then it belongs here. ― Susmuffin Talk 08:28, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
Support: I agree, having a separate article for Mars in one show (albeit a notable show) is not necessary at all. Nice catch, I would never have noticed this in the sea of wikipedia articles. Good job. Ghinga7 ( talk) 17:40, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
Think we can get this to GA in the foreseeable future? I'd be happy to help. Ping User:TompaDompa. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:09, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Benji man ( talk · contribs) 14:39, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
Good Article review progress box
|
Sorry this review took so long -- great article! The thoroughness of the referencing is deeply impressive. Pass! Benji man ( talk) 15:48, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
Phobos and Deimos in fiction has a small introductory paragraph with proper references, and then loads of unreferenced references to videogames, novels, TV series and similar. I propose to merge the little that deserves merging into this article, and then redirect it here. There's no need to set apart Mars and its moons when talking about their impact in fiction. Cambalachero ( talk) 13:50, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
The result was: promoted by
Bruxton (
talk)
18:36, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
Swift writes that the astronomy-loving Laputians had discovered 'two lesser stars, or satellites, which revolve about Mars', which raced around the planet in 10 hours and 21.5 hours respectively. Gulliver's Travels was written in 1726, over 150 years before the discovery of Mars's moons, Phobos and Deimos.( 4th Rock from the Sun: The Story of Mars)
Improved to Good Article status by TompaDompa ( talk). Self-nominated at 04:16, 11 December 2022 (UTC).
General: Article is new enough and long enough |
---|
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
---|
|
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation |
---|
|
QPQ: Done. |
Overall: @ TompaDompa: Good article. Hook is interesting, article is sourced, and the QPQ is done. Onegreatjoke ( talk) 17:22, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
Should the see also template be at the top or in a See Also section at the bottom? ✶Mitch 199811✶ 02:45, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
It is somewhat inexplicable that this article states in a couple of places that Klaatu from the 1951 science fiction film is a Martian. This isn't obvious on viewing the film, and it isn't mentioned in any of the related Wikipedia articles. Is this some sort of headcanon? Pharos ( talk) 16:59, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
when Klaatu of the original The Day the Earth Stood Still (1951) twice asserted his journey to Earth had taken 250,000,000 miles, and that his planet and Earth were "neighbors," he effectively communicated that Mars was his home planet, since Mars is the only known planet that is ever 250,000,000 miles from Earth (when the planets are in opposition).TompaDompa ( talk) 19:22, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
I'm sorry for bugging you again but I want to mention that Divine Comedy mentions Mars in the Paradiso. It is a location where men who died for Christianity exist(?). ✶Mitch 199811✶ 16:11, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
The redirect Mars (Doctor Who) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 June 21 § Mars (Doctor Who) until a consensus is reached. QuicoleJR ( talk) 18:56, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
The redirect Pomang has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 July 3 § Pomang until a consensus is reached. CycloneYoris talk! 23:11, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
The redirect Martian Congressional Republic. has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 4 § Martian Congressional Republic. until a consensus is reached. TompaDompa ( talk) 22:47, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
@ Patar knight, Mike Christie, and Cambalachero: The short description has been changed thrice in short order, from "none" to "Depictions of the planet" to "Fictional depictions of the planet" and back to "none". I rather agree with the rationale for "none", personally. "Mars in fiction" clearly defines the topic and needs no further clarification. The only possible point of confusion is if somebody thinks it refers to some other " Mars" (e.g. the deity or candy bar) than the planet, but it is implausible that such an article would be at the title "Mars in fiction" in much the same way as it would be implausible for any article about London, Ontario to be at a X in/of London title (which means that articles at such titles don't need to clarify that they are about London). Previous discussion can be found at Talk:Pluto in fiction#Short description. TompaDompa ( talk) 13:11, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
Seems odd for a featured article to contain so many 'links' to pages that don't exist. 51.52.43.171 ( talk) 11:50, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
Note as well that, if short stories do not have independent notability, we can always link instead to a section of an article or list that discusses it, turning it blue for the time being. Redirects with potential to become standalone articles may still be listed at Wikipedia:Requested articles/Arts and entertainment/Literature and Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/ArticlesNeeded. Cambalachero ( talk) 18:30, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
In my understanding, "the 1900s" would refer to the decade of 1900–1909, but in this article it appears to be used to mean the 20th century instead, and likewise for other centuries. Is this an established convention in the relevant field? Otherwise, I don't see why the article should refer to year periods in such a confusing way. -- Paul_012 ( talk) 02:48, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
In my understanding, "the 1900s" would refer to the decade of 1900–1909, but in this article it appears to be used to mean the 20th centuryseems to be a case of an editor used to one convention coming across another that they are not familiar with. As opposed to the text itself being problematic in terms of ambiguity. TompaDompa ( talk) 05:16, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
I do think the current usage is ambiguous and in contravention of the MOS's instruction "When using forms such as the 1900s, ensure there is no ambiguity as to whether the century or just its first decade is meant." For example,
The common-sense reading of the MOS is that any ambiguity must be addressed immediately when the reader encounters the '00s form, if not before, and especially not several paragraphs later, forcing them to backtrack and wasting their time. I hope I've demonstrated clearly enough why the current writing is far from optimal.
Also, as an aside, the article refers to "... the late 1800s [i.e. late 19th century] as it became clear that the Moon was devoid of life", but does not explain what scientific discoveries were made during this period that led to this knowledge. This is something that should be briefly explained and linked to. -- Paul_012 ( talk) 15:16, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
and I would also consider combining "1960s" with "20th century" mixing schemesSorry but that's just absurdly illogical. But all this isn't really relevant to the main issue: Since there seems to be preference for retaining the 1900s format, proper context needs to be provided to ensure there is no ambiguity, as required by the MOS. I've provided examples and explained how it's ambiguous to some readers. More reason-based arguments to the contrary would be appreciated, rather than plain statements of opinion
The common-sense reading of the MOS is that any ambiguity must be addressed immediately), I don't find the specific instances to have any problematic ambiguity—the consistency alone does a lot to help, and "mid-1600s" gets proper context by the year 1656, for instance. The readings of the "XX00s" as decades all come across as rather nonsensical, really—it seems like intentionally trying to misunderstand the text. TompaDompa ( talk) 20:31, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
XavierItzm, sources on Mars in fiction do not consider The Expanse to be an important WP:ASPECT of how Mars and its moons have been depicted in fiction. You might notice that the examples in this article otherwise come from high-quality sources specifically on the topic of Mars in fiction such as Imagining Mars: A Literary History, the "Mars" entry in The Encyclopedia of Science Fiction, and so on. You added The Expanse with much lower-quality sources that are not specifically on the subject of Mars in fiction, namely IGN and Syfy articles on The Expanse. This article is a WP:Featured article because it reflects the contents of high-quality sources on the topic of the article according to WP:PROPORTION. The Expanse does not belong unless you can point to some sources on the overarching topic that actually cover this topic. See also e.g. MOS:POPCULT and WP:NOTTVTROPES. TompaDompa ( talk) 04:06, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
each aspect with a weight proportional to its treatment in the body of reliable, published material on the subjectper WP:PROPORTION, and this simply doesn't belong with the level of sourcing you have provided. Feel free to add more comments later; in the meantime, I will remove the mention of The Expanse to maintain the quality of this WP:Featured article while it is on the main page. TompaDompa ( talk) 04:30, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
each aspect with a weight proportional to its treatment in the body of reliable, published material on the subject—"on the subject" being the key phrase. Mars in fiction is a WP:Featured article because it meets the WP:Featured article criteria, one of which is that the article
is a thorough and representative survey of the relevant literature. Part of being a representative survey of the relevant literature is of course giving the same relative weight to various aspects as the relevant literature does. This balance was discussed at some length during the WP:FAC, which you can read at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Mars in fiction/archive1 if you are interested. As science fiction scholar Gary Westfahl notes, there are thousands upon thousands of potentially relevant titles. Obviously, we cannot (and should not want to) include all of them in an article like this. So how do we decide which ones to include? We look at how the sources on the overarching topic— Mars in fiction—treat the subject.If anyone is escalating here, it's you—you made a WP:BOLD edit and were reverted, and rather than discussing the matter you reinstated your reverted edit. TompaDompa ( talk) 05:05, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
In
James S. A. Corey's
The Expanse (2017), Deimos is destroyed through military action by Earth's government.
[1]
[2]
[3]
substantive and lasting"—it sounds kind of like length (or maybe budget), but those are both clearly not appropriate. I think we'll quickly run back into the problem that any system is subjective; we need to go by sources. Sources that say Mars (or Deimos) is in the Expanse, or even central to its plot, don't indicate if something has had a substantive and lasting impact on fiction in Mars. They only contribute to a TV Tropes style listing every appearance of Mars in fiction, which is exactly the wrong way to go for an article like this.
It resonates with Red Mars and the SpaceX program, and Amazon Prime's The Expanse series in which Mars has become an independent military power and is on the brink of war with Earth over rising tensions of nationalism and resources.). Dylnuge ( Talk • Edits) 14:59, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
Turns out that while The Expanse is not covered by sources on the topic as such, the first novel Leviathan Wakes is (albeit neither frequently nor extensively), so I've added a brief mention that also covers that it was the first in a series that later had a television adaptation. This solution should hopefully be satisfactory to everyone. TompaDompa ( talk) 03:06, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
References
Earth blowing up Mars' moon, Deimos
we see the destruction of Deimos
Earth destroys the small Martian moon of Deimos (appropriately named after the Greek god of terror)