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 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | → | Archive 10 |
The Wikipedia:WikiProject Moon main page has just been created.
Cheers! Lunokhod 14:55, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
Surely there should be a moon portal? Mars has one and the moon will have as much related information, if not more. What do people think? - CharlesC 19:57, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Shouldnt' something be posted about the sattelite that crashed into it?
So, if the majority of the maria are on the near side of the moon, how could they be caused by a bombardment of meteors? Wouldn't meteors be more likely to hit the far side of the moon, since it has a larger range of angles that they could plausibly impact at? It just seems strange that almost all of the impacts occured on one side of the moon. The Prophet Wizard of the Crayon Cake { Prophesize) 02:16, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
The Maria formed before the moon became tidaly locked towards the Earth. The reason that that face is tidaly locked to us is because the maria are heavier and exert a stronger pull ont he Earth than any other face of it. Got it? The QBasicJedi 03:33, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
The above statement concerning tideal locking is a common misconception. The majority of the dated mare samples are between 4 and 3 billion years old, whereas physical models predict that the Moon would have tidally despun rapidly (on the order to 10 million years). Furthermore, the only parameter that affects the tidal despinning is the degree-2 gravity field (i.e., that portion that resembles a triaxial ellipsoid.), and it can be shown that the lunar mare contribute very little to this. It should also be mentioned that the Moon is just as stable (in a rotational sense) in its current configuration as in one where it is rotated by 180 degrees about its rotational axis. Thus, if you were to "spin up" the Moon somehow (such as by a very large impact), it could despin to a final configuration with mare located on either the near or farside. The reason for why the mare basalts all erupted on the nearside is still being debated in the scientific community. It is now known that most of the Moon's heat producing elements are located on the nearside where the mare basalts erruped, and this led to this region being volcanically active. However, it is currently unknown as to HOW the heat producing elements became concentrated in this region (commonly referred to as the Procellarum KREEP terrane).
Concerning the original question of asymmetric meteorite impacts, in fact, more should occur on the western hemisphere than the eastern hemisphere. This is simply a result of the Moon "driving into the rain". Mark Wieczorek Oct. 29, 2006
This looks pretty good! I wonder if it could be a good candidate to become a featured article, or is a 'good' article just right for this one at the moment? CoolGuy 05:16, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
Does anyone know where a graph of earth-moon distance over geological time could be found to add to the page? I've been doing edits on the Timeline of evolution and find it relevant for mentioning such things as historical tidal patterns. For example, apparently tides were 1000 feet high three billion years ago, but I don't have a good citation for that. Also, tangentially related, I see no reference to the moon as an influencer of earthquakes and volcanic eruptions--especially when the moon and sun line up for an eclipse (these would have been more extreme in the distant past). Kaimiddleton 08:29, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
This would be an interesting thing to add. http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/051207_moon_storms.html , Also, there is a picture of the instrument being used. The crews of Apollo 8, 10, 12, and 17 seen the storm. Thanks, CarpD 9/11/06
Note: This article has a small number of in-line citations for an article of its size and currently would not pass criteria 2b.
Members of the
Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles are in the process of doing a re-review of current
Good Article listings to ensure compliance with the standards of the
Good Article Criteria. (Discussion of the changes and re-review can be found
here). A significant change to the GA criteria is the mandatory use of some sort of in-line citation (In accordance to
WP:CITE) to be used in order for an article to pass the
verification and reference criteria. It is recommended that the article's editors take a look at the inclusion of in-line citations as well as how the article stacks up against the rest of the Good Article criteria. GA reviewers will give you at least a week's time from the date of this notice to work on the in-line citations before doing a full re-review and deciding if the article still merits being considered a Good Article or would need to be de-listed. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact us on the Good Article project
talk page or you may contact me personally. On behalf of the Good Articles Project, I want to thank you for all the time and effort that you have put into working on this article and improving the overall quality of the Wikipedia project.
Agne
00:58, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
The result of the debate was no move (speedy). — Mets501 ( talk) 13:28, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
Moon to Moon (moon). Consistancy with the naming of other moons, for example Charon (moon), Io (moon), Europa (moon) etc. Topses 19:28, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
This article is deficient in several of the good article criteria, as partially outlined below:
Opelio 09:46, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
As this is now the GA collaboration I believe that our first task would be to bring this article back to GA status by adressing the above concerns. Would anyone else like to suggest how we may help improve this article? Tarret 18:04, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
The caption on this image strikes me as non-NPOV and entirely subjective:
I don't find it surprisingly remote; on the contrary, it looks a bit closer than I had imagined. The caption should be changed to something more objective. -- Moondigger 21:27, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
The result of the debate was no consensus for move. Closing early per WP:SNOW. Joelito ( talk) 18:41, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
Moon → Luna or The Moon or Moon (Natural satelite) — I feel such a move would be prudent since "Moon" is a somewhat ambigious referance given Moon can be any Natural satelite. The confusion is self apperant on the introduction itslef. The intention of the requested move is to make "moon" a disambiguation. — Cat out 01:28, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
Add * '''Support''' or * '''Oppose''' on a new line followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~.
Add any additional comments:
I enjoyed this article, but I don't think it's at GA standard right now. My main objections:
Additionally, note that the peer review/ FA track might be more relevant for such a long article. Twinxor t 10:39, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
Any feelings on the correct capitalisation of this term and its opposite? See Talk:Full moon#Capitalisation. -- Guinnog 11:40, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
I removed the following paragraph because all but the first sentence is incorrect. Please see discussion in Lunar mare. There is no known mechanism by which tidal forces could create a nearside-farside asymmetry in crustal thickness. If you think you can do this, then you will be able to publish this result in Science or Nature!
Lunokhod 11:38, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
I had to remove the following sentences
The composition of the Moon does not resemble that of the Earth's crust, and the age of lunar crust has nothing to do with this problem (indeed, there are very few radiomentric ages for the ancient lunar anorthosites). Lunokhod 16:37, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
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 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | → | Archive 10 |
The Wikipedia:WikiProject Moon main page has just been created.
Cheers! Lunokhod 14:55, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
Surely there should be a moon portal? Mars has one and the moon will have as much related information, if not more. What do people think? - CharlesC 19:57, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Shouldnt' something be posted about the sattelite that crashed into it?
So, if the majority of the maria are on the near side of the moon, how could they be caused by a bombardment of meteors? Wouldn't meteors be more likely to hit the far side of the moon, since it has a larger range of angles that they could plausibly impact at? It just seems strange that almost all of the impacts occured on one side of the moon. The Prophet Wizard of the Crayon Cake { Prophesize) 02:16, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
The Maria formed before the moon became tidaly locked towards the Earth. The reason that that face is tidaly locked to us is because the maria are heavier and exert a stronger pull ont he Earth than any other face of it. Got it? The QBasicJedi 03:33, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
The above statement concerning tideal locking is a common misconception. The majority of the dated mare samples are between 4 and 3 billion years old, whereas physical models predict that the Moon would have tidally despun rapidly (on the order to 10 million years). Furthermore, the only parameter that affects the tidal despinning is the degree-2 gravity field (i.e., that portion that resembles a triaxial ellipsoid.), and it can be shown that the lunar mare contribute very little to this. It should also be mentioned that the Moon is just as stable (in a rotational sense) in its current configuration as in one where it is rotated by 180 degrees about its rotational axis. Thus, if you were to "spin up" the Moon somehow (such as by a very large impact), it could despin to a final configuration with mare located on either the near or farside. The reason for why the mare basalts all erupted on the nearside is still being debated in the scientific community. It is now known that most of the Moon's heat producing elements are located on the nearside where the mare basalts erruped, and this led to this region being volcanically active. However, it is currently unknown as to HOW the heat producing elements became concentrated in this region (commonly referred to as the Procellarum KREEP terrane).
Concerning the original question of asymmetric meteorite impacts, in fact, more should occur on the western hemisphere than the eastern hemisphere. This is simply a result of the Moon "driving into the rain". Mark Wieczorek Oct. 29, 2006
This looks pretty good! I wonder if it could be a good candidate to become a featured article, or is a 'good' article just right for this one at the moment? CoolGuy 05:16, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
Does anyone know where a graph of earth-moon distance over geological time could be found to add to the page? I've been doing edits on the Timeline of evolution and find it relevant for mentioning such things as historical tidal patterns. For example, apparently tides were 1000 feet high three billion years ago, but I don't have a good citation for that. Also, tangentially related, I see no reference to the moon as an influencer of earthquakes and volcanic eruptions--especially when the moon and sun line up for an eclipse (these would have been more extreme in the distant past). Kaimiddleton 08:29, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
This would be an interesting thing to add. http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/051207_moon_storms.html , Also, there is a picture of the instrument being used. The crews of Apollo 8, 10, 12, and 17 seen the storm. Thanks, CarpD 9/11/06
Note: This article has a small number of in-line citations for an article of its size and currently would not pass criteria 2b.
Members of the
Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles are in the process of doing a re-review of current
Good Article listings to ensure compliance with the standards of the
Good Article Criteria. (Discussion of the changes and re-review can be found
here). A significant change to the GA criteria is the mandatory use of some sort of in-line citation (In accordance to
WP:CITE) to be used in order for an article to pass the
verification and reference criteria. It is recommended that the article's editors take a look at the inclusion of in-line citations as well as how the article stacks up against the rest of the Good Article criteria. GA reviewers will give you at least a week's time from the date of this notice to work on the in-line citations before doing a full re-review and deciding if the article still merits being considered a Good Article or would need to be de-listed. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact us on the Good Article project
talk page or you may contact me personally. On behalf of the Good Articles Project, I want to thank you for all the time and effort that you have put into working on this article and improving the overall quality of the Wikipedia project.
Agne
00:58, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
The result of the debate was no move (speedy). — Mets501 ( talk) 13:28, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
Moon to Moon (moon). Consistancy with the naming of other moons, for example Charon (moon), Io (moon), Europa (moon) etc. Topses 19:28, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
This article is deficient in several of the good article criteria, as partially outlined below:
Opelio 09:46, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
As this is now the GA collaboration I believe that our first task would be to bring this article back to GA status by adressing the above concerns. Would anyone else like to suggest how we may help improve this article? Tarret 18:04, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
The caption on this image strikes me as non-NPOV and entirely subjective:
I don't find it surprisingly remote; on the contrary, it looks a bit closer than I had imagined. The caption should be changed to something more objective. -- Moondigger 21:27, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
The result of the debate was no consensus for move. Closing early per WP:SNOW. Joelito ( talk) 18:41, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
Moon → Luna or The Moon or Moon (Natural satelite) — I feel such a move would be prudent since "Moon" is a somewhat ambigious referance given Moon can be any Natural satelite. The confusion is self apperant on the introduction itslef. The intention of the requested move is to make "moon" a disambiguation. — Cat out 01:28, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
Add * '''Support''' or * '''Oppose''' on a new line followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~.
Add any additional comments:
I enjoyed this article, but I don't think it's at GA standard right now. My main objections:
Additionally, note that the peer review/ FA track might be more relevant for such a long article. Twinxor t 10:39, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
Any feelings on the correct capitalisation of this term and its opposite? See Talk:Full moon#Capitalisation. -- Guinnog 11:40, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
I removed the following paragraph because all but the first sentence is incorrect. Please see discussion in Lunar mare. There is no known mechanism by which tidal forces could create a nearside-farside asymmetry in crustal thickness. If you think you can do this, then you will be able to publish this result in Science or Nature!
Lunokhod 11:38, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
I had to remove the following sentences
The composition of the Moon does not resemble that of the Earth's crust, and the age of lunar crust has nothing to do with this problem (indeed, there are very few radiomentric ages for the ancient lunar anorthosites). Lunokhod 16:37, 30 October 2006 (UTC)