Editing Template talk:SolarSystem

==Pluto==
I have reverted [[User:BadWolf|BadWolf's]] edit, which removed Pluto from the planetry listings, and classed it as "other", for the reason that, whilst Pluto's status as a planet is debatable, it is still officially classed as one. Any comments/disagreements should be aired here. --[[User:GW Simulations|GW_Simulations]] 00:39, 16 April 2006 (MSD)

:I think as long as we can not be too sure on Plutos status, lets just keep it for historic reasons, that we have nine planets. Of course BadWolf is right: There are many objects around now, which are also a possible candidate for a planet.  But we have dozens of possible classifications on plutos class, which not all people currently can agree on. Lets have the historic nine planets and other objects (major comets, KBOs, TPOs, MFOWLLP) until we have something official which differs --[[User:Urwumpe|Urwumpe]] 01:31, 16 April 2006 (MSD)

==Redesign==

Lets make the template a bit broader and include the most relevant examples for objects of each class. Eg, have the sun away from the category "Other" and name its category: Star or Central star. For comets, NEOs, KBO, etc, lets just have 5 major examples (eg Halley) and a link named "more..." for a complete listing of such objects, eg via a category. --[[User:Urwumpe|Urwumpe]] 01:55, 16 April 2006 (MSD)
@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 :I think as long as we can not be too sure on Plutos status, lets just keep it for historic reasons, that we have nine planets. Of course BadWolf is right: There are many objects around now, which are also a possible candidate for a planet.  But we have dozens of possible classifications on plutos class, which not all people currently can agree on. Lets have the historic nine planets and other objects (major comets, KBOs, TPOs, MFOWLLP) until we have something official which differs --[[User:Urwumpe|Urwumpe]] 01:31, 16 April 2006 (MSD)
-::Nothing ''official'' about the status of a planet. Where did you get this? I removed it for two reasons, both I think good enough. 1) hardly any astronomers now consider it a planet as it perfectly matches the requirement of a Plutino. 2) This is an OrbiterWiki and Orbiter has eight planets. --[[User:BadWolf|BadWolf]] 03:50, 20 April 2006 (MSD)
-:::You can download an addon for Pluto. Anyway, your argument conflates a planet with an object which is present in Orbiter. Also, whilst it may be concidered not to be a planet by any number of astronomers, all attempts to remove this status have failed, so it must have some support. --[[User:GW Simulations|GW_Simulations]] 22:09, 20 April 2006 (MSD)
 ==Redesign==
 Lets make the template a bit broader and include the most relevant examples for objects of each class. Eg, have the sun away from the category "Other" and name its category: Star or Central star. For comets, NEOs, KBO, etc, lets just have 5 major examples (eg Halley) and a link named "more..." for a complete listing of such objects, eg via a category. --[[User:Urwumpe|Urwumpe]] 01:55, 16 April 2006 (MSD)
-*That would give us a huge template. But it is a good idea, maybe just one example though? --[[User:GW Simulations|GW_Simulations]] 17:39, 17 April 2006 (MSD)
-::I did a new redesign on the solar system template, reducing it to content which exists in [[Orbiter|Orbiters]] base installation and including links to lists of special addons. I was a bit unhappy with the large number of missing pages for small objects which was just created by the template. Now, the wanted pages could be a bit more useful. If nobody protests, i will start making similar reductions on the planet templates, only including information which exists in the base installation and create addon lists for additional content. --[[User:Urwumpe|Urwumpe]] 15:43, 7 March 2007 (MSK)