505:
repeating itself eternally. Astronomical objects are discovered all the time, but rarely is a discovery of particular note announced that causes a surge in activity, which then dies down after all the required articles have been started and fleshed out to a much slower-paced improvement of articles incorporating new developments in the field. I think that it is the lack of recognition of these surges and declines in activity that keeps WikiProject
Astronomy hanging by a thread, even though there are so many already extant articles that can be improved. What can be done to improve this is to consolidate all subprojects and to more actively market the existence of WikiProject Astronomy in order to build a committed team of editors that improves the necessary articles rather than merely working on those articles which are at the moment a "hot topic." This interview will help greatly to revitalize the project.
646:, and the old and dormant task forces and subprojects need to be immediately swept away. In the medium term, more publicity of this project should be happening, and the project should be made more cohesive, aggregating the latest astronomy news and sharing articles and journals on a specialized wiki page in order to ease the ability of users to write new articles and improve existing ones even when there are few astronomical discoveries being immediately made. This would greatly improve our coverage of the field of astronomy, ensuring that we leave less undone that we can do. This should all focus on the ultimate long-term goal of expanding and improving articles with all possible information sources, hopefully bringing all of the major user-facing articles to FA and less-major ones to GA, as well as generally improving previously marginalized astronomical articles.
246:
316:
324:
487:
online than other stuff I work on (biology), but translating material to common
English can be tricky indeed. Many members are only sporadically active so the WikiProject's activity can wax and wane markedly. Running prose by laypeople is extremely helpful and folks not familiar with astronomy are helpful in reviewing at FAC or GAN. I've gotten into constellations as they are relatively light on the hardcore astrophysics which I am not so good at....
730:
165:
257:
121:
111:
305:
604:
noticeable in the science fields. Overall though, I do think that we could be doing better in this area, as there are some requests from 2007 that have still not been answered. As for the other part of the question, I would say that the hardest part of creating these articles is finding sources. As I mentioned earlier, the subject will probably not have much coverage if it doesn't have an article yet, so finding
293:
279:
37:
131:
91:
141:
101:
268:
657:
A lot of astronomy articles have tons of unsourced statements and cruft (for lack of a better word) that's been added over the years. Any little bit helps, whether it's fixing the formatting, fixing typos, or adding sources. People with more time to spare could work on getting an astronomy article to
603:
Progress on these articles is progressing, slowly but surely. Take a look at the list and you will notice a smattering of bluelinks mixed in with the redlinks here. Of course, if a subject does not have an article on
Knowledge (XXG) yet, it is unlikely to receive much coverage, although this is less
551:
In my time here, no, there have not been any efforts to improve the articles. That doesn't mean that improving the articles is impossible at all; it is very possible for one person or a small group to take a VA to FA level. As for the second part of the question, some topics are much easier to write
492:
The fields of astronomy and spaceflight has been covered by a variety of WikiProjects over the years, prompting the reorganization and merging of astronomy subprojects on several occasions. How is the current assortment of astronomy subprojects faring? What can be done to increase communication and
560:
to FA, as
Neptune has concrete boundaries around which to write about, while universe is a little more abstract. Do we write about all multiverse theories? How much of the Big Bang do we include? Overall though, I would encourage anyone who is interested to improve the vital articles, as improving
504:
The number of articles actively edited by WPAST increases and decreases in cycles based on how and when new astronomy-related news is released. Like any scientific field, progress comes in the form of a punctuated equilibrium, proceeding rapidly before settling to a lower base rate, with the cycle
486:
really ramped up the momentum. Titrating the prose between exact but dry and engaging but possibly too wordy was an interesting endeavour. I think astronomy articles can be very tricky to improve to balance the prose, and working on them collaboratively is to be recommended! A lot more sources are
423:
template somehow, and noticed that many of the stars were redlinks. I forget the exact order of events after this, but eventually I wound up joining the project and am now working on creating articles for all stars brighter than magnitude 5. Having joined recently, I don't have any GAs or FAs here
624:
In my opinion, there are three ultimate goals: create all requested and redlinked articles, improve all mid-importance or higher articles to GA, and bring all top-importance articles to FA. Of course, these are long-term goals and will probably never be complete, but even creating one article or
30:
Reach for the Stars: WikiProject
Astronomy: This week, we set off for the final frontier with WikiProject Astronomy, started in August 2006 using the now-defunct WikiProject Space as inspiration, home to 101 pieces of Featured material and 148 Good Articles maintained by a band of
574:, but again, they weren't done during my time with the project. Since I've joined, people have been working on the constellation articles on the vital list, several of which are now FAs or GAs. I'd love to see more coordinated effort on other vital astronomy articles!
207:
412:
Having joined somewhat recently (July 2012), I can clearly remember why I chose to join the project. Originally here on
Knowledge (XXG), I worked exclusively on chemical element articles for WikiProject Elements, but around this time, I came across the
629:
typos to fix or missing categories and such. Really, short of adding plain inaccuracies or introducing vandalism, all additions to astronomy articles are helpful and we would appreciate any new editors who do something as small as adding a missing
518:, which has effectively been folded into the main project. I agree with Wer900, it may be helpful to the project as a whole to keep the guideline pages and resources compiled by the subprojects but, for example, redirect the talk pages to
641:
The short-term goals of this project should be an immediate restructuring and decision-making process formalization in order to improve the efficiency of the project. Out-of-date pages should be removed and newer ones should be added
589:
754:
401:
What motivated you to join WikiProject
Astronomy? Have you contributed to any of the project's Featured and Good Articles? Do you participate in any of WikiProject Astronomy's subprojects and task forces?
216:
784:
717:
708:
378:
374:
366:
789:
769:
779:
515:
774:
759:
700:
77:
747:
358:
537:
350:
198:
741:
461:, who took the lead on Corona Australis. Though I've been busy with women scientists lately, I hope to continue pushing all of the constellation articles to GA and ultimately, FA.
56:
45:
685:
If you know anything about astronomy, or even if you don't, please think about contributing to WPAST! We're a really friendly group, and we would love to have you on board :).
432:
after I finish my current projects. I guess one could consider me to be most active in the astronomical objects project, but I plan to branch out into other areas eventually.
625:
bringing one article from C-class to B-class really helps. Also, there is a constant need for grammar checkers, category fixers, and the like, as there are always small
903:
475:
354:
21:
878:
873:
868:
342:
863:
519:
570:
I know that the planet articles are largely FAs, but if I remember correctly, that was done a couple of years ago. There are others, including
192:
370:
183:
362:
583:
Not sure, I have not seen any organised official collaborations on astronomy topics, but they might yield some Good Vital
Articles.....
333:
858:
729:
540:. Have there been any concerted efforts to improve these articles? Why do some vital articles receive greater attention than others?
50:
36:
17:
514:
Though I think the overarching project is doing okay, the subprojects aren't as active. The only one I've been involved in is the
361:
of all space-related projects, WikiProject
Astronomy has served as one of the primary outlets for space-enthusiasts, alongside
341:
as inspiration. WikiProject
Astronomy is home to 101 pieces of Featured material and 148 Good Articles maintained by a band of
847:
445:
at the time and was planning to work on more constellation articles. I've contributed to a few constellation FAs (Andromeda,
338:
592:? What are the greatest difficulties editors face when creating or expanding new articles about astronomy-related topics?
699:
Next week, we'll get tongue-tied by a complicated project. Until then, feel free to conduct a discourse analysis in the
245:
442:
531:
My feelings align with Keilana's - I think redirecting the talks to the main project talk page is the way to go.
482:
in some ways ranks as my most rewarding and fascinating FA to have worked on, I initially worked it up and then
884:
417:
669:
Getting some more mainpage candidates (i.e. FAs) - Betelgeuse attracted a lot of visitors to the mainpage.
450:
272:
658:
GA. There are a lot of freely-available sources, and there's a pretty big pool of willing collaborators.
446:
250:
237:
680:
619:
598:
546:
407:
382:
261:
315:
323:
94:
286:
124:
454:
346:
104:
694:
I totally agree with StringTheory - it's a really fun project with a lot of work to do! :)
134:
256:
483:
425:
304:
229:
Submit your project's news and announcements for next week's WikiProject Report at the
478:
some time ago in early 2008. It remained my one astronomy FA until earlier this year.
457:, which were really positive, collaborative experiences. I especially enjoyed helping
897:
664:
578:
526:
465:
458:
390:
154:
689:
652:
565:
509:
470:
I've been there off and on over the years- I read a couple of really cool books on
436:
386:
114:
144:
636:
499:
429:
394:
479:
292:
278:
613:
What are the project's most urgent needs? How can a new editor help today?
557:
297:
441:
I too joined recently, in April 2012. I joined because I was working on
553:
282:
471:
608:
sources relating to the topic in question can be a very hard task.
571:
552:
about than others. For example, it would be much easier to make
381:). This week's interview includes WikiProject Astronomy members
309:
267:
556:
an FA (it is already) than it would be to bring something like
337:. The project was started in August 2006 using the now-defunct
55:
536:
There are 226 astronomy-related articles on Knowledge (XXG)'s
728:
163:
35:
353:, and provides resources for editors adding or requesting
424:
yet, but I have brought another natural science article,
831:
819:
812:
800:
843:
Get the latest headlines on your user page – just add
220:
and you could see the answer in a future issue of the
214:
Curious about WikiProjects? Ask us a question at the
817:If your comment has not appeared here, you can try
331:This week, we set off for the final frontier with
208:January 2013 Copyedit Backlog Elimination Drive
181:For anyone interested in the origin of names,
561:them gives the biggest benefit to the reader.
428:, to FA and am currently planning to work on
8:
588:Has the project made any progress creating
828:No comments yet. Yours could be the first!
520:Knowledge (XXG) talk:WikiProject Astronomy
493:collaboration between all the subprojects?
72:Reach for the Stars: WikiProject Astronomy
904:Knowledge (XXG) Signpost archives 2013-01
322:
314:
303:
291:
277:
266:
255:
244:
18:Knowledge (XXG):Knowledge (XXG) Signpost
820:
804:
71:
319:A celestial map from the 17th century
29:
7:
57:
28:
674:Anything else you'd like to add?
327:The Earth, as seen from the Moon
139:
129:
119:
109:
99:
89:
813:add the page to your watchlist
1:
590:requested astronomy articles
349:, works on an assortment of
920:
345:. The project maintains a
443:Andromeda (constellation)
202:newsletters are available
516:Constellations Taskforce
371:WikiProject Solar System
351:vital astronomy articles
184:WikiProject Anthroponymy
363:WikiProject Spaceflight
199:WikiProject Formula One
733:
721:"WikiProject report" →
538:list of vital articles
451:Auriga (constellation)
328:
320:
312:
301:
289:
275:
273:Large Magellanic Cloud
264:
253:
168:
40:
848:Signpost-subscription
732:
447:Aries (constellation)
334:WikiProject Astronomy
326:
318:
307:
295:
281:
270:
259:
248:
167:
39:
810:To follow comments,
755:Investigative report
713:"WikiProject report"
251:barred spiral galaxy
367:interviewed in 2011
359:2010 reorganization
262:Flaming Star Nebula
187:could use your help
805:Discuss this story
785:Arbitration report
765:WikiProject report
734:
476:buffed that one up
329:
321:
313:
302:
290:
276:
265:
254:
190:New issues of the
169:
69:WikiProject report
46:← Back to Contents
41:
821:purging the cache
790:Technology report
770:Discussion report
339:WikiProject Space
287:ultraviolet light
175:Universal Edition
51:View Latest Issue
911:
887:
852:
846:
824:
822:
816:
803:
780:Featured content
752:
744:
737:
720:
712:
455:Corona Australis
422:
416:
373:(interviewed in
355:astronomy images
271:A region of the
238:WikiProject Desk
235:
217:WikiProject desk
211:is in full swing
173:
172:WikiProject news
170:
166:
157:
143:
142:
133:
132:
123:
122:
113:
112:
103:
102:
93:
92:
63:
61:
59:
919:
918:
914:
913:
912:
910:
909:
908:
894:
893:
892:
891:
890:
889:
888:
883:
881:
876:
871:
866:
861:
854:
850:
844:
840:
839:
834:
832:+ Add a comment
829:
826:
818:
811:
808:
807:
801:+ Add a comment
799:
795:
794:
793:
745:
742:14 January 2013
740:
738:
735:
724:
723:
718:
715:
710:
420:
418:Stars of Cygnus
414:
243:
242:
241:
233:
227:
177:
176:
171:
164:
162:
158:
152:
151:
150:
149:
140:
130:
120:
110:
100:
90:
84:
81:
70:
66:
64:
58:14 January 2013
54:
53:
48:
42:
32:
26:
25:
24:
12:
11:
5:
917:
915:
907:
906:
896:
895:
882:
877:
872:
867:
862:
857:
856:
855:
842:
841:
838:
837:
836:
835:
830:
827:
809:
806:
798:
797:
796:
792:
787:
782:
777:
775:Special report
772:
767:
762:
760:News and notes
757:
751:
739:
727:
726:
725:
716:
707:
706:
705:
698:
696:
695:
686:
681:StringTheory11
671:
670:
660:
659:
648:
647:
632:
631:
620:StringTheory11
610:
609:
599:StringTheory11
585:
584:
575:
562:
547:StringTheory11
533:
532:
523:
506:
489:
488:
462:
433:
426:periodic table
408:StringTheory11
383:StringTheory11
228:
226:
225:
212:
203:
188:
178:
174:
161:
160:
159:
148:
147:
137:
127:
117:
107:
97:
86:
85:
82:
76:
75:
74:
73:
68:
67:
65:
62:
49:
44:
43:
34:
33:
27:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
916:
905:
902:
901:
899:
886:
880:
875:
870:
865:
860:
849:
833:
823:
814:
802:
791:
788:
786:
783:
781:
778:
776:
773:
771:
768:
766:
763:
761:
758:
756:
753:
749:
743:
736:In this issue
731:
722:
714:
704:
702:
693:
691:
687:
684:
682:
678:
677:
676:
675:
668:
666:
662:
661:
656:
654:
650:
649:
645:
640:
638:
634:
633:
628:
623:
621:
617:
616:
615:
614:
607:
602:
600:
596:
595:
594:
593:
591:
582:
580:
576:
573:
569:
567:
563:
559:
555:
550:
548:
544:
543:
542:
541:
539:
530:
528:
524:
521:
517:
513:
511:
507:
503:
501:
497:
496:
495:
494:
485:
481:
477:
473:
469:
467:
463:
460:
456:
452:
448:
444:
440:
438:
434:
431:
427:
419:
411:
409:
405:
404:
403:
402:
398:
396:
392:
388:
384:
380:
376:
372:
368:
364:
360:
356:
352:
348:
344:
340:
336:
335:
325:
317:
311:
306:
299:
294:
288:
284:
280:
274:
269:
263:
258:
252:
247:
239:
232:
223:
219:
218:
213:
210:
209:
204:
201:
200:
195:
194:
189:
186:
185:
180:
179:
156:
146:
138:
136:
128:
126:
118:
116:
108:
106:
98:
96:
88:
87:
79:
60:
52:
47:
38:
23:
19:
764:
748:all comments
697:
688:
679:
673:
672:
663:
651:
643:
635:
626:
618:
612:
611:
605:
597:
587:
586:
577:
564:
545:
535:
534:
525:
508:
498:
491:
490:
464:
435:
406:
400:
399:
357:. Since the
332:
330:
230:
221:
215:
206:
197:
193:Help Project
191:
182:
885:Suggestions
644:and updated
430:Eta Carinae
343:186 members
480:Betelgeuse
310:red planet
83:Share this
78:Contribute
22:2013-01-14
879:Subscribe
484:Sadalsuud
285:shown in
898:Category
874:Newsroom
869:Archives
711:Previous
665:Casliber
606:reliable
579:Casliber
558:universe
527:Casliber
466:Casliber
459:Casliber
391:Casliber
298:Pleiades
283:Sunspots
231:Signpost
222:Signpost
155:Mabeenot
125:LinkedIn
105:Facebook
20: |
701:archive
690:Keilana
653:Keilana
566:Keilana
554:Neptune
510:Keilana
474:, so I
437:Keilana
387:Keilana
300:cluster
115:Twitter
637:Wer900
630:space.
500:Wer900
472:Sirius
453:, and
395:Wer900
393:, and
369:) and
347:portal
135:Reddit
95:E-mail
864:About
627:tyops
16:<
859:Home
719:Next
572:star
379:2011
377:and
375:2008
308:The
296:The
260:The
205:The
196:and
145:Digg
31:186.
153:By
80:—
900::
851:}}
845:{{
709:←
703:.
449:,
421:}}
415:{{
397:.
389:,
385:,
249:A
236:s
853:.
825:.
815:.
750:)
746:(
692::
683::
667::
655::
639::
622::
601::
581::
568::
549::
529::
522:.
512::
502::
468::
439::
410::
365:(
240:.
234:'
224:!
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
