Talk:Extraterrestrial atmosphere

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Plan for the article[edit]

I see this article has returned from the dead a second time. I'm a bit concerned about this for two reasons:

  1. Essentially the same concerns of the AfD remain: the article implicitly claims that the solar system is warming, which is original synthesis. It's better now that the title doesn't claim that, at least—but the content still does.
  2. What is the goal for content in this article? It shouldn't be just a list of descriptions of the atmosphere of each planet. That can go in the planets' individual articles. There has to be some common thread to tie the content together. And keep in mind that Solar system already talks about each of the planets' atmospheres.

Seems like these concerns will have to be addressed, or else the article will just end up on AfD again, wasting everyone's time. --Nethgirb 12:37, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, sorry. UBeR restarted an article with similar content and I just fixed the page history as to where it came from; after Stephan put a request on UBeR's talk page ref licences. It needs a considerable rework to match the title: he did this a bit but his revisions got lost because I couldn't see a way to merge two sets of histories. Give a few days to sort out a plan please...the title not longer claims the solar system is warming but the contents ain't great. --BozMo talk 13:31, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Okey dokey --Nethgirb 14:04, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A categorization of extraterrestrial atmospheres would help - any opinions on how to do so, e.g. by type of astronomical body (terrestrial type, gas giant, moon, star), or atmospheric composition? Given the title, we should definitely include extrasolar planets and possibly stellar atmospheres. Hal peridol 14:07, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe planets, then other solar system bodies (moons, comets), then beyond the solar system? (I am not an astronomer!) Raymond Arritt 14:21, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe a bit too much categorization? ;-) ~ UBeR 16:01, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Probably - I would like to type things into similar groupings, but I'm not sure what the most obvious way to do that is. Hal peridol 16:50, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I guess this thing gets a chance to develope but I share Nethgirbs concerns; this is too similar to the deleted article at the moment. It will get speedied if it isn't careful William M. Connolley 16:58, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As long as it's here, it might as well have content; its unclear right now whether an article on a set of such disparate topics is more useful than leaving the content in the individual main articles, but perhaps something more can be made of it.Hal peridol 17:14, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, it might be useful to include content from the perspective of the study of planetary atmospheres, e.g. NASA planetary science. Hal peridol 17:22, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Between Hal's insertion of good content and my machete acting on the rest, I think it's getting there. Raymond Arritt 17:42, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Falsifications in determining the density of planets[edit]

The atmospheres of different planets are included or not included in the volume of planets to calculate the average density of the matter of the planets Alex makeyev (talk) 13:45, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A certain height of the atmosphere of different planets is either included in the total volume of the planet, or is not included. Whereas gas giant planets have very dense clouds in their atmospheres, impervious to the optical range of electromagnetic radiation, located very high: many hundreds and thousands of kilometers from the underlying dense viscous fluid and (or) plastic solid. The volume of gas giant planets includes the volume of atmospheric gases up to the upper edge of the clouds. And rocky planets have either sparse or dense atmospheres. But the volume of rocky planets does not include the volume of atmospheric gases from the surface to the upper edge of clouds. Therefore, the calculated density of rocky planets is many times greater than that of gas giant planets. Alex makeyev (talk) 13:35, 22 August 2022 (UTC) Alex makeyev (talk) 14:02, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Neptune[edit]

Can somebody with full access to the article at http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2007/2006GL028764.shtml check if our description is correct? At least in the abstract, I find no mentioning of a warming of Neptune, only of brightness.

BTW, I planned add a description of the atmosphere of Jupiter, and someone already did! Now I have no excuse not to do my taxes... ;-)--Stephan Schulz 20:08, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll check tomorrow. Thanks, Hal peridol 20:26, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Done (but of course Hal can double-check and add more). Raymond Arritt 20:34, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like a good assessment of the article - Hammel and Lockwood cover some of this and some aspects of Uranian brightness in Icarus, January 2007. The Uranus correlation is somewhat more tenuous. Hal peridol 22:32, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Atmospheres of Saturn and Uranus[edit]

When we talk about Saturn's atmospere layers, the disc is actually dull blue or something like opals. The sky in the upper layer must be something like blue-purple or indigo color smae as Jupiter, or Saturn is multi-color almost like Jupiter. I'm not sure of any source say the exact of disc Saturn's color, but to be accurate it's more like iridescent or opal-blue. And also Great White Spot is not a long living storm. I occurs in a cycle, like once every 10 to 20 years. Uranus is not always featureless, though it looks bland and pale blue most of the time. Somewhere in the section you should mention about the dark spot, probably one storm happens over coldest seasons when the disc looks greener. The sky is more like turquoise or azure blue.--Freewayguy What's up? 23:25, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also I forgot, Great Dark Spot is not a permanent storm on Neptune. THe disc is rich tropical blue, when the disc looks greener over coldest seasons, the dark sopt fades away, Voyagers have found a time when Neptune becomes featureless or a bland turquoise globe. It is better to mention somewhere in the article.--Freewayguy What's up? 23:29, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why is the Solar System the main image ?[edit]

It presents a pretty narrow worldview. A collage of different atmospheric limbs for bodies of varying sizes would be much more appropriate. Suggestions are Saturn/Jupiter, Earth, Titan, Triton and a comet.--EvenGreenerFish (talk) 05:42, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Extraterrestrial atmospheres. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:12, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Confusing article titles[edit]

MERGE
(non-admin closure)

Fairly large consensus to merge, both numerically and in argument weight; any exoplanet-specific material can go to Exoplanet#Atmosphere per Mooseandbruce1.

TigraanClick here to contact me 16:45, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Discussion[edit]

At a first glance I thought that Extrasolar atmosphere was just a duplicate article of Extraterrestrial atmospheres because well their titles are too similar. Although the latter focuses on the study of terrestrial exoplanet's atmospheres the first one talks about atmospheres around exoplanets in general. I think these article titles are too similar and therefore can be confusing, but I'm not sure what can be done to solve this titling issue. Thoughts? Davidbuddy9Talk 23:05, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like a good candidate for merge. Issues specific to exoplanets (like detection methods, specific examples) would be easily merged into Exoplanet, while the speculation about what type of atmospheres might exist could all fit into a section heading. Suggest a merge and redirect, with Extraterrestrial atmospheres as the primary article (perhaps with a "see also - exoplanet" at the relevant section). --Yeti Hunter (talk) 02:27, 7 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Extraterrestrial atmosphere is about the atmospheres of astronomical objects other then Earth, not necessarily terrestrial exoplanet's atmospheres. MartinZ02 (talk) 11:59, 7 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe put all under Exoplanet atmospheres (currently a redirect)? "Extrasolar" might sound like atmospheres having something to do with stars, while "Extraterrestrial" might sound like having to do with non-terrestrial planets; the technical definitions are lost on casual readers. (Yes, some "exoplanets" may not be true planets, but things are sketchy enough at this point that they are fine all lumped together.) --A D Monroe III (talk) 14:12, 7 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
But most of the content is currently about atmospheres within the solar system, so "Exoplanet atmospheres" doesn't work. The casual reader is not going to get hung up on the definition of a "terrestrial planet" - I think "Extraterrestrial" nicely encapsulates the topic; ie, atmospheres other than Earth's. --Yeti Hunter (talk) 00:13, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
"Extraterrestrial" Can still mean atmosphere outside of the solar system though. So what about Atmospheres in the Solar System? Davidbuddy9Talk 16:29, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Just merge them and it'll be fine. MartinZ02 (talk) 17:02, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, just merge them. BatteryIncluded (talk) 18:07, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, "Extrasolar atmosphere" in particular is too ambiguous. Praemonitus (talk) 18:52, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps Atmospheres on other planets, Atmospheres on other planets and moons (if we have to be that particular), or Non-Earth atmospheres. But if we keep Extrasolar atmospheres, I'd move it to Exoplanet atmospheres, and move such info from this article to that. --A D Monroe III (talk) 20:25, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, or perhaps "Extrasolar planet atmospheres". Praemonitus (talk) 20:46, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Don't merge as the methods of study, and levels of knowledge are very different. However the titles are confusing, and I suspected that I might read about stellar atmospheres, so instead of "Extrasolar atmosphere", use "exoplanet atmosphere". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Graeme Bartlett (talk • contribs) 08:40, 11 July 2016‎ (UTC)[reply]
The articles should not be merged because the two topics are different. I think the confusion stems from the titles which are too similar. IMHO the right thing to do is to change the name of this article. Silvio1973 (talk) 11:08, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The articles should be merged, because part of the content of "Exoplanet atmosphere" is completely applicable to all atmospheres: they are "Atmospheric circulation", "Precipitation", "Abiotic oxygen", i.e., this is a content fork. Discarding this, we see that "Exoplanet atmosphere" becomes quite small and mergeable (keeping in mind that Extraterrestrial_atmosphere#Exoplanets is a big chunk already), and the article still remains small. When the size becomes prohibitive, it may be split in three: general/main article Extraterrestrial atmosphere, Atmospheres in the Solar System and Atmospheres outside the Solar System. Staszek Lem (talk) 20:12, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
There's already a section in extraterrestrial atmosphere about exoplanet atmospheres, and size isn't a problem in this case. —MartinZ02 (talk) 23:42, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I think a merge would be good for this situation. Any content that is specific to exoplanets, however, could be merged into https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exoplanet#Atmosphere. Mooseandbruce1 (talk) 01:35, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I would vote for merge. These were made separate accidentally instead of intentionally. I haven't seen a convincing case presented for their separation, and they both study essentially the same thing. Kortoso (talk) 22:46, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Extraterrestrial atmosphere. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:56, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Extraterrestrial atmosphere. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:04, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Extraterrestrial atmosphere. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:16, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Planetary Atmospheres[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 28 March 2022 and 10 June 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Miratip (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Carleydf (talk) 17:35, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Extraterrestrial_atmosphere&oldid=1207162338"