WikiProject iconAstronomy: Astronomical objects / Solar System Template‑class
WikiProject iconThis template is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.
TemplateThis template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Taskforce icon
This template is supported by WikiProject Astronomical objects, which collaborates on articles related to astronomical objects.
Taskforce icon
This template is supported by Solar System task force.

Meaningless edit to remove 1527 redlinks[edit]

Congratulations, this page is the single most redlinked-to from the main article space. Though commiserations, it is red no longer. :) Alai 03:35, 5 November 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

scattered disc terminology[edit]

In the Trans neptunian objects subsection, I have changed Scattered disc to Scattered disc objects. There are several reasons why this is preferable:

  1. Firstly, the primary source of the terminology comes from the expression "Scattered disc object" which indicates that the object's orbit is in a certain class. "scattered disc" is a derived term. In fact, many or most scattered disc objects spend a part of their orbit within the Kuiper belt.
  2. The term "scattered disc" is then named after these objects, because at present they are the only ones known to pass through the region immediately beyond the Kuiper belt. However, if objects with circular orbits at, say, 80 AU were found, they would not be scattered disc objects, even though they would be in the region currently called the "scattered disc".
  3. This all can be seen in the name itself. It's not that we have a disk that has been scattered, but that there are objects that have been scattered from the "disc" (of the solar system).
  4. Lastly, aesthetically, though this slightly lengthens the text of the template, there is still much space on the second line anyway, so the template itself does not take up any more space.

Deuar 20:03, 25 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]


The existing item "Minor Planets" should have a new sub-header added called "Trojans" (in addition to the two existing sub-headers "Asteroids" and "Distant Minor Planets".

Into this new sub-header, there would be the visible names: Mars, Jupiter, Neptune.

--RSStockdale (talk) 17:50, 18 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

And Earth trojans, mustn't forget them. Whoop whoop pull up Bitching Betty | Averted crashes 14:41, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

To Martin (MSGJ) - Do you think that you could do this suggestion also? Or give me Admin rights for an hour or so, and I'll put it in. It is trivial, but would add needed information into the template. RSStockdale (talk) 13:14, 30 September 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Template title change suggestion[edit]

Now that we have changed the title of the small Solar System body article back to its formally correct typography (which is sentence case, since the term is a common noun; see the talk page), I suggest we change the template title (which appears at the top of the template) to "Small Solar System bodies", for the same reason. WolfmanSF (talk) 23:55, 17 September 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Edit request from WolfmanSF, 23 September 2011[edit]

The template title (which appears at the top of the template) should be changed to to "Small Solar System bodies" because "small Solar System body" is a common noun (and thus a term normally presented in sentence case), as well as to be consistent with the title of the article by the same name.

WolfmanSF (talk) 03:51, 23 September 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think that the best we can do is ((lowercase)) because of the mediawiki software - see Wikipedia:Naming conventions (technical restrictions). Hope this is what you were looking for. Skier Dude (talk) 04:26, 23 September 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sorry, that wasn't what I intended; that change should be reverted. The problem is that in the actual coding for the template, which starts out:
|name = Small Solar System bodies
|state = uncollapsed
|title = Small Solar System Bodies
in the last line, the title is specified to appear at the top of the template box as "Small Solar System Bodies" by the pipe "Small Solar System body|Small Solar System Bodies" when it should be piped to "Small Solar System bodies". WolfmanSF (talk) 00:27, 24 September 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:06, 24 September 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Asteroids - Aten[edit]

Aten should be moved to be a parenthetical item after Near-Earth, as it is a sub-grouping of Near-Earth

RSStockdale (talk) 13:23, 30 September 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Near Earth Asteroid link[edit]

Please update the link for Near Earth Asteroid to Near-Earth_object#Near-Earth_asteroids, to avoid the current re-direct. John a s (talk) 10:28, 1 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Page link[edit]

Hi. The article Damocloid asteroid changed its title into Damocloid. Can somebody fix the link? It is in the section "Distant minor planets". Thanks a lot. --Dэя-Бøяg 23:51, 25 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Could we add Sednoids to the TNO populations? — kwami (talk) 23:07, 20 February 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the ((edit template-protected)) template. — ((U|Technical 13)) (etc) 13:03, 25 February 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Template-protected edit request on 30 July 2015[edit]

Vulcanoids, as in vulcanoid asteroids, should be added as part of the asteroids section. DN-boards1 (talk) 19:06, 30 July 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the ((edit template-protected)) template. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:51, 30 July 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Template-protected edit request on 3 July 2016[edit]

* [[Asteroid belt|Main-belt]] → * [[Asteroid belt]]

The article is located at "Asteroid belt" and there is no need to have the category be different-looking. --JorisvS (talk) 10:47, 3 July 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

In the early history of this template, the link used to be Main belt, which redirects. At some point, it became the piped-link. I don't think unpiping is controversial, as "Asteroid belt" is surely the common name. Done. Ping if there are any issues. — Andy W. (talk ·ctb) 02:02, 4 July 2016 (UTC) 02:14, 4 July 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Why is this page currently located on over 3,000 articles? WP:BIDIRECTIONAL suggests this isn't the proper usage of this template. ~ Rob13Talk 23:40, 3 July 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Looks like it's being used on most of the pages in Category:Numbered minor planets. I think the navbox is serving as a form of generic see-also. The semiactive WikiProject may have more context into this. — Andy W. (talk ·ctb) 02:09, 4 July 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I agree. It's a navbox, and thus it should be transcluded only by articles that it references (and not necessarily all of them). HandsomeFella (talk) 11:14, 20 April 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Template-protected edit request on 12 February 2017[edit]

Please remove the following line:

* [[Pronunciation of asteroid names|Pronunciation of names]]

Reason: The associated page, Pronunciation of asteroid names, has been deleted, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pronunciation of asteroid names. --mach 🙈🙉🙊 17:41, 12 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done Izno (talk) 18:58, 12 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Edit request[edit]

Hi. Can you please put back the items you removed the past couple of edits, they were a part of the template and the topic for a long time. I don't mean the red-link that was requested to be removed above, but the entire section of small solar system bodies. Thanks. Randy Kryn 20:26, 12 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Randy Kryn: All of the items in the template were preserved except where a) they were not concordant with WP:NAV/WP:NAVBOX (most specifically, the meteroids links--all were anchor links) or b) WP:BRINT. I could re-add the 2 category links I removed, but those aren't directly relevant to the topic. --Izno (talk) 21:11, 12 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Template-protected edit request on 12 February 2017[edit]

For grammar reasons, could the words "asteroid" and "distant minor planet" be made plural? Furthermore, could you add hyperbolic comets, long-period comets, and Halley-type comets exoplanetaryscience (talk) 20:57, 12 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Exoplanetaryscience: I prefer to remove "s" when it's not a part of the name of the article. I'll add the others. --Izno (talk) 21:13, 12 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Alright then, thanks! exoplanetaryscience (talk) 21:19, 12 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Template-protected edit request on 31 January 2020[edit]

Main-belt comet was recently moved to active asteroid. Please remove "Main-belt" from the comet section and add "Active" to the asteroid section. See the talk page for the consensus on the move. Yarnalgo talk to me 03:48, 31 January 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 23:52, 31 January 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Template-protected edit request on 12 April 2020[edit]

add a link for Cis-Neptunian object Raarthik (talk) 04:36, 12 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

To editor Raarthik:  done (and thank you very much!) P.I. Ellsworth  ed. put'r there 07:41, 12 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Template-protected edit request on 14 July 2020[edit]

Since Aten asteroids are often considered NEOs I was wondering if it was possible to move it under Near-Earth along with the related NEO classes, possibly in this format:

Near-Earth (Amor·Apollo·Aten·Atira)

If this is not viable, perhaps removing the Aten category, or adding relevant categories (such as the Atiras) could be done?

--Ornithoptera (talk) 06:46, 15 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the ((edit template-protected)) template. Most things are possible, but it sounds like this may be a change that some people might take issue with. Please have a discussion at WP Astronomy to verify that this change has consensus. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:24, 17 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Template-protected edit request on 28 September 2021[edit]

Please change the link "Meanings of minor planet names" to "Meanings of minor-planet names". I just boldly moved the page to the hyphnenated version because there's a compound modifier in the name. HandsomeFella (talk) 14:47, 28 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

To editor HandsomeFella:  done. P.I. Ellsworth - ed. put'r there 04:09, 29 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
To editor HandsomeFella: curious as to what you will do about ((Meanings of minor-planet names))? You may have already noted that there are a lot of sub-articles that need the hyphen, well, technically anyway. That's probably why editors haven't done this until now. P.I. Ellsworth - ed. put'r there 05:07, 29 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've seen that. Lots of work. HandsomeFella (talk) 06:03, 29 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]