Portal talk:Astronomy

Portal review
Portal	Astronomy
Classification	QB
Class	Q: Science
Subclass	B: Astronomy
Classifier	User:Xxagile
Reviewer	AdamBMorgan
Notes

astrology is not a related field

Astrology isn't a field of study. from wikipedia: An academic discipline, or field of study, is a branch of knowledge which is taught or researched at the college or university level. Disciplines are defined and recognized by the academic journals in which research is published, and the learned societies and academic departments or faculties to which their practitioners belong.

You cant get a doctorate in astrology at a legitimate accredited university. Most University don't even offer a course in it. There is no legitimate Research done on the subject. And Research is not confided the subject of science, for example one can Research history. Astrology is just made up superstitions and is not more a field of study then wizardry or witchcraft. And isn't a sub field of Astronomy. Chris 13:13, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

• It was, back when many of our texts were written, and it was studied at universitiesSherurcij ^{Collaboration of the Week: Author:Winston Churchill} 17:25, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
• So what if a person can't get a doctorate in astrology. Saying that astrology is a not a related field is only your opinion. Nobody is making such categorical statements but you. Whether or not it's taught in universities, or reported by pompous journals, etc. has nothing to do with us. Works about astrology have been published, and that's all there is to it. If nobody is promoting prejudicial views in favour of astrology, then we would thank you to avoid prejudicial views against it. Also not that the excpression used was "related field" not "sub field". Eclecticology 19:11, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

All links to non Astronomy subjects must be removed

This is call astronomy, so only Astronomy subjects should be here. Sub fields of Astronomy can go here until they have there own subject, but human spaceflight is not sub field of astronomy, nor are most of NASA's works. For example a subfield of astronomy could be astrophysics. Please see below for what astronomy is.

From wikipedia: Astronomy is the scientific study of celestial objects (such as stars, planets, comets, and galaxies) and phenomena that originate outside the Earth's atmosphere (such as the cosmic background radiation). It is concerned with the evolution, physics, chemistry, meteorology, and motion of celestial objects, as well as the formation and development of the universe.Chris 15:49, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Then create a sub-index, otherwise this holds "all space-related material" until we have sub-indices for them.Sherurcij ^{Collaboration of the Week: Author:Winston Churchill} 17:25, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Sherurcij. Indexes are there to gide the reader into finding what he wants. If Chris wants to act constructively about space exploration related material he would do better to develop the appropriate parts of the indexing. Eclecticology 19:11, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

• Is Ptolemy considered astronomy or astrology? Sherurcij ^{Collaboration of the Week: Author:Winston Churchill} 22:27, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

That would depend on the text in question. For example the Tetrabiblos would full under astrology and the Almagest would be Astronomy. Chris 23:06, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

This index is a "best-effort" Wikisource topical index. There is no requirement that these are ruled by inclusion criteria determined by an external definition of the term "Astronomy". In order to justify a "Astrology" topical index, we need someone who is motivated to maintain it. Creating a topical index with a few redlinks is easy, but it is a pointless endeavor if it is not maintained, and nobody intends to populate the index with real works about that topic. John Vandenberg 23:17, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Wikimedia links

Hi!

I'd like to link this Portal to v:Portal:Astronomy, w:Portal:Astronomy and d:Portal:Astronomy! Suggestions? --Marshallsumter (talk) 14:41, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

It is already linked at Wikidata. That is sufficient. Hrishikes (talk) 15:09, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

@Marshallsumter: There are already links in the left margin and at the top of the page in the sister-links box. --EncycloPetey (talk) 15:48, 9 May 2018 (UTC)