Talk:Gliese 876 c
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Gliese 876 c article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | Gliese 876 c has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||
 | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
.jpg){kind=small}
GA Sweeps Review: Pass edit
As part of the WikiProject Good Articles, we're doing sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria. I'm specifically going over all of the "Planets and Moons" articles. I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. I have made several minor corrections throughout the article. Altogether the article is well-written and is still in great shape after its passing in 2006. Continue to improve the article making sure all new information is properly sourced and neutral. I would also recommend going through all of the citations and updating the access dates and fixing any dead links. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. I have updated the article history to reflect this review. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 10:21, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Incorrect Planetbox usage edit
The image in the infobox should not be used as it does not follow the usage guide for the template:
This template is part of a group of templates that are used to display information about a specific extrasolar planet. Images of published planetary properties are preferred where available, especially when they are available from cited publications. Artist's conception, regardless of the source, should be avoided. Examples of acceptable images include * direct images, such as one used for GJ 758 b, in the rare cases where these are available; * output of a model that is integral to a cited paper, such as the image used in HD 80606 b; * user-generated images that clearly illustrate published properties, such as the size comparisons currently used in GJ 1214 b or Gliese 436 b.
My edits followed these guidelines but were revered by User:MarioProtIV. I'm opening discussion as to why ...
--EvenGreenerFish (talk) 09:26, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
- I would like if the discussion was held here, rather then on all of the other pages. --MarioProtIV (talk/contribs) 11:12, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
- The current image fails every guideline ever written for artist's conceptions and astronomical imagery. The most explicit would be WP:ASTROART but there have been numerous discussions on this subject. This image is so far from a reliable source and so far from representing any known features of the planet, it is ridiculous. Lithopsian (talk) 17:54, 6 March 2018 (UTC)