Misplaced Pages

Talk:Enceladus

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Zxcvbnm (talk | contribs) at 22:59, 26 June 2022 (Requested move 16 June 2022: Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 22:59, 26 June 2022 by Zxcvbnm (talk | contribs) (Requested move 16 June 2022: Reply)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Enceladus 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
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 2 months 
Featured articleEnceladus is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Misplaced Pages community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page as Today's featured article on July 20, 2006.
In the newsOn this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
April 17, 2006Peer reviewReviewed
June 2, 2006Featured article candidatePromoted
July 26, 2016Featured article reviewKept
In the news A news item involving this article was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the "In the news" column on April 5, 2014.
On this day... A fact from this article was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on August 28, 2012.
Current status: Featured article

Template:Vital article

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconAstronomy: Astronomical objects Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Misplaced Pages.AstronomyWikipedia:WikiProject AstronomyTemplate:WikiProject AstronomyAstronomy
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Astronomical objects, which collaborates on articles related to astronomical objects.
WikiProject iconAstronomy: Solar System
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Misplaced Pages.AstronomyWikipedia:WikiProject AstronomyTemplate:WikiProject AstronomyAstronomy
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by Solar System task force.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconVolcanoes Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Volcanoes, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of volcanoes, volcanology, igneous petrology, and related subjects on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.VolcanoesWikipedia:WikiProject VolcanoesTemplate:WikiProject VolcanoesWikiProject Volcanoes
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconSpoken Misplaced Pages
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Spoken Misplaced Pages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles that are spoken on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Spoken WikipediaWikipedia:WikiProject Spoken WikipediaTemplate:WikiProject Spoken WikipediaSpoken Misplaced Pages

Template:WP1.0

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconWeather: Space Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Weather, which collaborates on weather and related subjects on Misplaced Pages. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details. WeatherWikipedia:WikiProject WeatherTemplate:WikiProject WeatherWeather
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Space weather task force (assessed as Low-importance).
A fact from this article was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the On this day section on August 28, 2017 and August 28, 2021.

Cassini flyby of plume

The data gathered by Cassini in her final flybys in October (E21) and December 2015 (E22) are expected to yield some clues regarding the chemistry of the moon's ocean and prospects for some form of biochemistry. The data may not be published until December 2016, it seems....

Cassini did a final flyby of Enceladus in late October that targeted the chemistry of the plumes directly. The INMS team, which includes Glein, is searching for molecular hydrogen in that plume, which would be chemical evidence of active serpentinization. An absence of molecular hydrogen would be a sign that the serpentinization is extinct. The data analysis from this flyby may be completed in time for the American Geophysical Union's fall meeting in December. Glein added that the planned NASA mission to Europa includes advanced descendants of both the CDA and INMS instruments, meaning that in a decade or two, scientists can start to make these same measurements at Europa. This will allow us to better understand the importance of serpentinization across the Solar System.

http://www.space.com/32021-how-life-friendly-is-enceladus-ocean.html

Requested move 16 June 2022

It has been proposed in this section that multiple pages be renamed and moved.

A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil.


Please use {{subst:requested move}}. Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly. Links: current logtarget logdirect move

No clear primary topic for this name, the mythological giant gets about 1/5 the views of the moon daily probably a lower ratio when hits to the moon that continue on to the giant are factored in. This ratio is low as-is, but the giant also has longterm significance vastly exceeding the moon since the moon was named after the giant. These add up to make it so that no primary topic exists. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ () 14:30, 16 June 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. >>> Extorc.talk 07:57, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

  • Support per nom.--Ortizesp (talk) 18:41, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
  • Support per nom. Paul August 15:38, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
  • Support per nom, and with the added bonus of consistency with all other major Saturnian moons. — RAVENPVFF · talk · 09:18, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose. The 5-to-1 page view ratio is large. It is dissimilar to cases like Triton (where, in contrast, the moon and mythological figure have roughly equal page views: ). Furthermore, there is no reason to believe that "the giant also has longterm significance vastly exceeding the moon", considering that Being the original source of the name is also not determinative of a primary topic (Misplaced Pages:Disambiguation#Primary topic). Indeed, if one wanted to debate about long-term significance, I would argue that it also favors Enceladus the moon. The moon is of great scholarly interest (and pop-sci interest too), as is immediately apparent on Google Scholar, while the giant is a mythological figure of minor interest (scholarly or popular). Astronomers frequently write papers (and book chapters, and even whole books) devoted to Enceladus the moon, while classicists scarcely devote such works to the giant. I think that says a lot about the relative "enduring notability and educational value" of the two topics. Adumbrativus (talk) 05:36, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
    If people didn't think the giant was important, why (in space) would they ever name an entire moon after it? Your argument contradicts itself. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ () 22:59, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
  • Leaning support I agree being the original isn't determinate but it should at least be a more than minimal factor. Crouch, Swale (talk) 12:07, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose - View ratio very much supports this being the primary topic, as does a general search online to see what is meant when people search for the word Enceladus; it is overwhelmingly the moon they are referring to. Even if each view on the giant's page were a followthrough from this page, and we were to take away those views from this page, that still means that this page is over 4 times as viewed as the other topic. That shows an overwhelming interest in this article over the other, making this the clear primary topic with respect to usage. The giant having longterm significance does not create primacy by any means, as it was a very minor mythological figure even within its field, and the moon itself also has longterm significance and is much more significant in its field than the giant is in its own field. Merely being older does not matter. Per WP:DPT: "While long-term significance is a factor, historical age is not determinative." As to Ravenpuff's comment on consistency with the other moons, Misplaced Pages policy, specifically WP:CONSIST, makes it clear that parenthetical disambiguation is not something that needs to be consistent between similar subjects. - Aoidh (talk) 13:12, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
  • Relisters comment : There are arguments presented by opposes of the move and supporters agree with Nom, currently there is no consensus for either actions so I'm relisting for thorough consensus. >>> Extorc.talk 07:57, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose per User:Adumbrativus. The moon article is primarytopic by both usage and significance. "Being named after" is a very minor consideration (see Boston versus Boston, Lincolnshire). The status quo is better for readers and editors alike. Dohn joe (talk) 16:27, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
    The longterm significance criterion says otherwise. It is not a "minor consideration" in all cases. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ () 22:57, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
Categories: