User talk:76.66.199.238

267:

exoplanet extremes for stars, and for records. Since category exoplanets is for exoplanets, the sort key is for extremes. Since lists of planets is for lists and planets, but not just for exoplanets, the exoplanet sortkey would be appropriate. Since this is ostensibly a list of planets, and the planetary systems is for stars and planets, an exoplanet sortkey would be appropriate, since lists of stars is for stars, and this is a list of stars in subordination to its planets, the exoplanet sortkey is appropriate.

1154: 1057: 993: 838: 774: 1219: 696:

with them, or vice versa. If the update happens first at the extremes list, and then propagates the the list of a type, there would be less problems, with the see more link. Atleast the three proximity lists are unlike to change the extreme member, while we can also link back through the table entry for the most extreme member to the extremes list. (ie. entry says ] as the note on that place on the list)

1118: 1264: 282:

doesn't seem quite appropriate since they're exo-, meaning precisely "out of this world" :) But maybe we shouldn't be too literal. Also, regarding the asterisk in the planetary systems category, that doesn't seem necessary (why sort the article first (in the "*" list) in that category?). Was that intentional or did it slip under your radar? --

202: 663:

Collating the star extremes into a single list may increase the usability of the information, for say, highschool projects, and it would match the existence of the other extremes lists that are already on Knowledge. Each entry in the star extreme list would also feature a link to the list article, as

935:

I edited by IP for four years, but a combination of a desire to increase my participation, policy changes that limited IP's privileges, and a desire to be recognized by those I worked with before (the institution that supplies my internet controls several hundred IP addresses over several ranges, so

685:

I'm not sure I got you about the star extreme list. Do you suggest having the information in a single page and also duplicated in specific lists? I could agree with that, but at first it seems like providing great potential for desynchronization (and the resulting list could be quite large; it seems

128:

Irregardless of that template I inserted above to welcome you, you don't have to register here. I've been an anonymous editor for awhile (I have to register only because my IP was changed) and it's definitely okay to stay anonymous around here as long as you're contributing to Knowledge. Once again,

964:

I concur with the suggestion. You seem to be very active on WP, but dynamic IPs make it difficult to contact you directy. I'd strongly encourge you to consider registering as a coutrtesy to others editors who may need to cntact you about your edits, or to seek advice from you. I addition, it allows

1124:

If you get an account or figure out a way to maintain a stable IP address, I'll give you one of my barnstars. Believe me, you've earned it, but I don't want to give a rotating IP address one, and then in a month, have someone else inherit this IP and start causing problems. I have a reputation to

695:

Well, the same happens with Earthly extremes, as Earth has multiple lists, and the extreme member of the list also occurs at the extremes list. True, keeping the lists in sync may cause problems, but they are the same problems as occurs when a list is updated without updating the articles that go

541:

It might be useful to also have chronological list of past "extreme" titleholders, as it indicates the state of science at the time they were thought to be the extreme example of their kind. That kind of listing already occurs for least distant galaxy, most distant galaxy, most distant object, at

390:

that it was a star list as well as a planet list. As content is similar, with stars and planets both being on the list, it is still a kind of star list. As for why use an asterisk, the other entries in that category are sorted using the asterisk, when they involve content of this kind (general

281:

In defense of Special Cases, I must say that the diff engine is quite broken indeed. I didn't realize you just switched categories that were already there, sorry. I would have the one about stars removed, since the page is about planets. What do you think about that? Also, the world record one

710:

Ok, you've got some points there. I think we should create these pages then. I just realized, by reading the section below, that you can't create them. If you want to set up a draft, I can later move it to mainspace to preserve your contributions (I could help as well but my time is extremely

266:

I ordered it planets, lists of planets, planetary system (stars), lists of stars, and records. The sort keys were added, as this is extremes for exoplanets, exoplanet extremes for planets, planetary extremes for planetary sytems (actually, thinking about it again, "extremes" would also work),

391:

lists). As for why even sort there, they are not individual planetary systems, so it would be best to place them at the beginning or end of the sortlist, with individual planetary system articles taking up the actual sort headers. There was some discussion about this many years ago at

920:

I think about it whenever I have to create multiple interlinked pages... but that's not too often... when Knowledge removed page creation by IP editors, was when I seriously thought about it, but by that time, I'd been an IP user for a long time already.

898:

Have you considered getting an account. It will prevent the whole 'changing IP addresses' problem, and give you a more solid and recognizable identity here. I think it would help WikiProject North America if you had an account listed. Just a thought.

90:. Doing so is free, requires no personal information, and provides several benefits such as the ability to create articles. For a full outline and explanation of the benefits that come with creating an account, please see 845: 339:

Yeah... does seem to be distinctly unfriendly. I saw your comment when I noticed my thread had disappeared from his talk page, and I looked in the history to see if he left a response before deleting it.

671:

Yeah... Valles Marineris - largest canyon in the Solar System, Olympus Mons - largest volcano and mountain in the Solar System... You'd find this in some atlases, so it would be good to have here.

547: 1233:

For being a founding member of the project, from the WikiProject council proposal all the way through the project's approval and formation, I award you, my new colleague, this star.

621:

could start their own tables there and possibly get split as well in the future if they grow large enough. Also, we could include supernova extremes, which I didn't seem to find (

1161: 1064: 448:

The navbox could include links to those sections, and not be transcluded in those generic lists. It would still be useful/interesting for the specific lists, methinks. --

109:

on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your IP address (or username if you're logged in) and the date. If you need help, check out

735: 403:

could mean universe :) (And there is no supercategory in the hierarchy tree above "world records" to put it, Earth extremes is categorized there as well)

218:

by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!

1000: 417:

Fair enough. Keep up the nice work. :) Btw, ever thought of creating an "astronomical extremes" navbox? Seems like there's enough material for that. --

120: 922: 781: 721: 697: 672: 665: 553: 470: 435: 404: 367: 341: 268: 240: 176: 165: 31: 739: 528: 1282: 1174: 1077: 1013: 858: 794: 91: 664:

a "for more information see this list" type link. There is a workpage for the chronological list of nearest star record holders at

965:

you to gain credit for your work, as you have no easy way to prove that it was actually you who made specific IP contributions. -

195: 387: 57: 636: 524: 62: 53: 622: 66: 1325: 538:

I've used succession templates many times, so it came to me, when you brought up template navigation for extremes.

72: 1277:. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may 567: 516: 1241: 1197: 1133: 1100: 1036: 944: 907: 881: 817: 602: 1313: 743: 38: 27: 578: 520: 102: 106: 1344: 1291: 1339: 110: 1235: 1191: 1127: 1094: 1030: 938: 901: 875: 811: 215: 211: 175:

I did not remove any content. If you diff'd the edit, you would see that. It even added bytes!!!

159: 155: 48: 1153: 1056: 992: 837: 773: 130: 1278: 532: 79: 1349: 970: 644: 571: 543: 427: 158:

has been reverted, as it appears to have removed content from the page without explanation.

1218: 34:. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might like to see: 1270: 936:

I rarely had the same one twice) pushed me to make an account, about a month ago in fact.

396: 1263: 590: 586: 582: 431: 223: 134: 114: 1147: 1050: 986: 831: 767: 610: 458: 392: 43: 640: 618: 598: 1329: 1297: 1181: 1125:

uphold, you know. Think of it as a shameless incentive to commit to an identity.

1084: 1020: 865: 801: 527:

should be created? It'd make the footer template easier to implement. Along with

1117: 966: 712: 687: 686:

star data on Knowledge is more abundant than for other astronomical objects). --

655: 614: 594: 484: 449: 418: 358: 302: 283: 258: 231: 1334: 1274: 462: 95: 434:

with no "extremes" list per se, except for the extreme element on each list.

1303: 1248: 1204: 1170: 1140: 1107: 1073: 1043: 1009: 974: 951: 930: 914: 888: 854: 824: 790: 747: 729: 715: 705: 690: 680: 658: 630: 626: 561: 487: 478: 452: 443: 421: 412: 375: 361: 349: 305: 286: 276: 261: 248: 234: 184: 169: 138: 1318: 257:. The new categories don't make as much sense ans the previous ones... -- 150: 647:, and looking at those articles there doesn't seem to be a list around. 720:

Sure thing, I'll get about doing it soon, when I have a bit of time.

1180: