Talk:Ceres (dwarf planet): Difference between revisions

== Multiple entries saying that this is an "Asteroid" ==

On the NASA website this is stated as NOT being an asteroid. Yes, it is in the asteroid belt, but it a dwarf planet. PAGE: https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/planets/dwarf-planets/ceres/overview/ (look at No.4 on list). I believe NASA should be considered a very valid authority. NASA tends to defer to other agencies/ organisations as well. If no one objects I can go through and remove references implying it is an asteroid. If someone beats me to it then fine. EDIT: I have now found there is a large archive... Look the issue is that there is contradiction. It is either a dwarf planet or asteroid! It says in the opening paragraph, so any further refs are indeed contradictions (asteroid). [[Special:Contributions/92.238.237.65|92.238.237.65]] ([[User talk:92.238.237.65|talk]]) 03:46, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

:I object. Numerous objects fit multiple categories. -- [[User:Kheider|Kheider]] ([[User talk:Kheider|talk]]) 06:40, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

:Indeed. "Asteroid" has no formal definition. BTW, I'd like to know where they got their estimate of the mass of the asteroid belt from, that Ceres is 25%. (I assume that's spurious precision for a quarter.) — [[User:Kwamikagami|kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 21:29, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

::OK, no problem. It just seemed to me that NASA would have been classed, at least on some level, as an authoritative body. [[Special:Contributions/92.238.237.65|92.238.237.65]] ([[User talk:92.238.237.65|talk]]) 23:09, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

:In general parlance, Ceres is both a DP and an asteroid. There is no formal definition of "asteroid", so no chance for a contradiction in that sphere either. [[User:Double sharp|Double sharp]] ([[User talk:Double sharp|talk]]) 15:11, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

::Same as above comment regarding NASA. [[Special:Contributions/92.238.237.65|92.238.237.65]] ([[User talk:92.238.237.65|talk]]) 23:10, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

==RfC: Shall this article be deemed American English or British English only?==

{{closed rfc top|1=The article's subject hasn't got a strong connection to any English-speaking country whatsoever, so the variety used really doesn't matter so long as it is used consistently. There are better ways to waste our time than this. If folks here want BrE, as the vote indicates, '''so be it. [[WP:BOLD|Go for it]]'''. <small>([[Wikipedia:Non-admin closure|non-admin closure]])</small> [[User:Szmenderowiecki|Szmenderowiecki]] ([[User talk:Szmenderowiecki|talk]]) 19:55, 9 October 2022 (UTC)}}

<!-- [[User:DoNotArchiveUntil]] 00:01, 19 October 2022 (UTC) -->{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|1666137683}}

As the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Ceres_(dwarf_planet)#ENGVAR discussion above illustrated], there are reasonable reasons for using either English variant in the article. It appears to have started in American English (semimajor rather than semi-major), when more than a stub it may have been both American and British English (hard to tell), and when first nominated as a good article it looks to be a mix (colour but neighborhood) with American dates. When it made "good article" it was still a mix of usage and dates. When it made featured article it was still a mixture of styles plus it had American dates. It went through years of demotions. In 2021 it was relisted as a good article... American English but British dates. That has stayed ever since, until yesterday. Having both styles in one article is messy for an encyclopedia so we should settle on one type and use it throughout. Yesterday someone changed it all to British English and today someone added the template "British English Only." This is a level 4 vital article and a former featured article; current and past good article. There should be consensus before adding such a permanent template to this article so I'm attempting it here. [[User:Fyunck(click)|Fyunck(click)]] ([[User talk:Fyunck(click)|talk]]) 23:07, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

*American English only

*British English only

*<s>Use both styles in the article</s> (This would be against Wikipedia's [[MOS:CONSISTENT]])

===Survey===

*I started the RFC and I'm totally flexible on what we use so long as it has consensus. [[User:Fyunck(click)|Fyunck(click)]] ([[User talk:Fyunck(click)|talk]]) 23:07, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

*'''BrE'''. i) I don't think this requires an RFC. It could have been resolved on this talk page. ii) the RFC introduction acknowledges that there are good reasons for either AmE or BrE, then only lists the reasons in favour of AmE, which is not neutral. iii) I don't think it particularly matters, iv) there are no obvious national ties per [[MOS:TIES]] and v) the oldest version I can find which uses a specific variant of English in the text (as opposed to wikicode or links) is [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ceres_(dwarf_planet)&diff=next&oldid=5221561] in August 2004. That used the BrE spelling 'catalogue'. So unless I missed an earlier diff, [[MOS:RETAIN]] means the article should be in BrE. [[User:Modest Genius|<b style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: maroon;">Modest Genius</b>]] [[User_talk:Modest Genius|^talk]] 15:05, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

*:What reasons did I give to use either? I simply checked key milestones and reported what I found. And "catalogue" is part of a proper name so of course it used that spelling. [[User:Fyunck(click)|Fyunck(click)]] ([[User talk:Fyunck(click)|talk]]) 18:28, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

*[[User:Mahagaja/Unified English Spelling|Unified English]] and [[ISO date]]s. [[User:Kwamikagami|— kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 23:56, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

*[[MOS:RETAIN]] pertains to the first non-stub version of an article. Back in the day dates were linked and auto-formatted to taste, so date format does not imply English format, and indeed NASA, for example, uses dmy format in its books. Language and date formatting do not require an RfC but can be changed for an individual article based on local consensus on the talk page. In this case there are no obvious national ties per [[MOS:TIES]] so I would recommend sticking with DMY dates. [[User:Hawkeye7|<span style="color:#800082">Hawkeye7</span>]] [[User_talk:Hawkeye7|<span style="font-size:80%">(discuss)</span>]] 23:07, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

* '''British English''', per Modest Genius. I do not see the relevance of semi-major v semimajor. [[User:Dondervogel 2|Dondervogel 2]] ([[User talk:Dondervogel 2|talk]]) 23:10, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

*:Semimajor is the American spelling. The usage of a hyphen is British. [[User:Fyunck(click)|Fyunck(click)]] ([[User talk:Fyunck(click)|talk]]) 00:27, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

*::According to which RS? [[User:Dondervogel 2|Dondervogel 2]] ([[User talk:Dondervogel 2|talk]]) 08:18, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

*:::Misunderstanding here. There is no RS because there is no authoritative standard for American English, just style guides published by government, commercial and educational organisations. When we refer to American English what mean is American English as defined by our own Manual of Style ([[WP:MOS]]). This has been established by consensus on the MOS talk pages. While most Americans will find it quite normal most of the time, it has some peculiar quirks. [[User:Hawkeye7|<span style="color:#800082">Hawkeye7</span>]] [[User_talk:Hawkeye7|<span style="font-size:80%">(discuss)</span>]] 19:11, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

*::::I don't understand. Are you saying there is no such thing as an RS for any American English words? Or that there is no RS for the use of hyphens? [[User:Dondervogel 2|Dondervogel 2]] ([[User talk:Dondervogel 2|talk]]) 20:22, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

*:::::We have RS for English words. What we don't have is authoritative sources for what constitutes American forms. [[User:Hawkeye7|<span style="color:#800082">Hawkeye7</span>]] [[User_talk:Hawkeye7|<span style="font-size:80%">(discuss)</span>]] 20:30, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

*::::::What's wrong with [[Merriam-Webster]]? [[User:Dondervogel 2|Dondervogel 2]] ([[User talk:Dondervogel 2|talk]]) 21:45, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

*::::::: Don't get me started on [[Noah Webster]], who used spelling to advance the cause of American Christian Nationalism, and therefore is responsible not just for the spellings, but for American snowflakes getting hurt feelings when they see different spellings [[User:Hawkeye7|<span style="color:#800082">Hawkeye7</span>]] [[User_talk:Hawkeye7|<span style="font-size:80%">(discuss)</span>]] 21:26, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

*::::::If {{tq|Semimajor is the American spelling. The usage of a hyphen is British.}} is true, how come our article is at [[semi-major and semi-minor axes]], in US English spelling? And how come Brittanica [https://www.britannica.com/science/semimajor-axis uses] "semimajor"? This really isn't a very good way to decide it. There are so many unevidenced assertions in this unnecessary RfC. [[User:John|John]] ([[User talk:John|talk]]) 22:05, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

*:::::::We weren't getting anywhere with a couple people discussing it so it is best that many eyes see what's going on. Many of our articles are a mish-mash of usage as was this articles when it it made good status. Just like "catalogue" when it's used in a title of a work doesn't signify British English. When someone wants to suddenly demand, by template, that this article be changed to British English then we need more eyes. If it changes, it changes. I didn't even !vote because this looked like a perfect venue for those in "WikiProject Astronomy/Astronomical objects" to help out with their knowledge and experience and with the beginnings of this article fairly convoluted. And whether you have semi-major/semimajor. semi-circle/semicircle, semi-final/semifinal, the ones with the hyphens tend to be British English as they have retained the hyphen in many spellings where American English hasn't. Regardless, it looks like, for whatever reasons, editors want British English for this article. [[User:Fyunck(click)|Fyunck(click)]] ([[User talk:Fyunck(click)|talk]]) 22:22, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

* '''British English''', per Modest Genius. [[User:Gog the Mild|Gog the Mild]] ([[User talk:Gog the Mild|talk]]) 18:15, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

* '''British English''', per Modest Genius. [[User:John|John]] ([[User talk:John|talk]]) 20:31, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

===Discussion===

I don't yet see evidence that the article was started in American English. Can you provide such evidence? [[User:John|John]] ([[User talk:John|talk]]) 23:19, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

:You mean like the very first entry where the editor used an American English date format? [[User:Fyunck(click)|Fyunck(click)]] ([[User talk:Fyunck(click)|talk]]) 23:27, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

::No, I mean spelling. Date formats are not spelling and were less important back then. It would be a shame to have an RfC based on a false premise. [[User:John|John]] ([[User talk:John|talk]]) 23:35, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

:::It is important but also we have the use of "semimajor axis" in the second edit which is usually the [https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/semimajor%20axis American English variety] as opposed to the British "semi-major axis." I don't think there is any doubt it was done in American English to start. But it really doesn't matter as it was a stub at that time. It may also have been only American English when it was first more than a stub... but it's hard to tell. I did tweak the wording to say it "appears" as opposed to ironclad. [[User:Fyunck(click)|Fyunck(click)]] ([[User talk:Fyunck(click)|talk]]) 23:38, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

::::It's not that hard to tell. You just have to go back and find a nonstub revision that was written predominantly in American English. This would evidence the assertion in the RfC. Otherwise, what's the point of the RfC? [[User:John|John]] ([[User talk:John|talk]]) 06:35, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

:::::It is hard to tell. If it's extra easy you find it instead of nit-picking. There are hundreds of non-stub versions where I'm searching for British spellings vs American spellings. The point of an RFC is to get many editors from space and science to come to a consensus agreement. That's all I'm trying to do. I read the above discussion and wrote the RFC based on what I found myself, and if it doesn't satisfy you then !vote for status quo mixed. [[User:Fyunck(click)|Fyunck(click)]] ([[User talk:Fyunck(click)|talk]]) 06:58, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

::::::It isn't nit-picking to ask you to provide evidence for the assertion you made in your statement above. If you are unable to provide any evidence, but still want to have an RfC, I will consider this as a borderline [[WP:POINT]] activity, especially alongside your (equally false, or at least unevidenced) assertion that the current status quo is "mixed". It is not, and cannot be. Why on earth would anyone !vote for that, or recommend someone else to? Another problem is that you have not clearly stated in your RfC whether you are talking about spelling (my concern) or date formats (which has not been raised as a concern). I think you need to rethink the whole thing. The article was stable and peer-reviewed in 2007 using UK English spelling, so RETAIN tells us to leave it in that spelling. The solution was to follow RETAIN. There is no need to have a malformed RfC based on false premises to solve this. [[User:John|John]] ([[User talk:John|talk]]) 09:12, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

:::::::Goodness gracious. I gave evidence that you seem to ignore. The status quo is mixed as far as words and dates. The most recent long term status quo is a mix of American English words and British dates. What we see right this second is not the status quo, it was just not reverted. [[User:Fyunck(click)|Fyunck(click)]] ([[User talk:Fyunck(click)|talk]]) 10:05, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

::::::::My last effort to resolve this here. [[MOS:DATETIES|"For any given article, the choice of date format and the choice of national variety of English (see Wikipedia:Manual of Style § Strong national ties to a topic) are independent issues."]] <small>The US military, for example, uses day-month-year dates, and so we are recommended to use this date format on US military-related articles, although they would use American English spellings.</small> If you want to go off on a tangent about dates, have at it, but I am concerned with '''spelling'''. I have seen no evidence presented here that spelling (never mind dates) was ever standardised on US English on a non-stub version of this article until the recent work. On the other hand, there is lots of evidence that the 2007 FA version was written in British English. Therefore, per RETAIN, it should have been retained in this spelling, in the absence of strong national ties (nope) or a strong consensus to change it (don't see that either). It seems wholly straightforward to me and not worth the effort of an RfC when we already have a very clear policy in place to cover cases like this. [[User:John|John]] ([[User talk:John|talk]]) 16:20, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

:::::::::If we go by Retain. it should then be retained as American English since the first non-stub version was American English. And the last time it passed a good article it was not in British English. I should also point out that this came about because someone unilaterally just changed this article to British English. If nothing happens with this consensus building it goes back to American English. [[User:Fyunck(click)|Fyunck(click)]] ([[User talk:Fyunck(click)|talk]]) 02:20, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

::::::::::[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ceres_(dwarf_planet)&oldid=6167285 This version] is in British English (catalogue, not catalog). It does not seem like a stub to me. Is there an earlier version in US English? [[User:Dondervogel 2|Dondervogel 2]] ([[User talk:Dondervogel 2|talk]]) 23:01, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

:::::::::: I now see that {{u|Modest Genius}} has already made this same point. I concur. [[User:Dondervogel 2|Dondervogel 2]] ([[User talk:Dondervogel 2|talk]]) 23:07, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

:::::::::::The thing is, even in American English that catalog tends to be called "Mayer's zodiacal catalogue" or "Catalogue of Zodiacal Stars." It a proper name. And throughout all those edits it was using semimajor rather than semi-major. The first thing I can see that isn't a link or proper names is in the [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ceres_(dwarf_planet)&oldid=71600300 24 August 2006 update] when space authorities update the definition of a planet. American English "neighborhood" is used. We have to really dig in and search to find these things because it isn't obvious which to use. The last time it made "Good Article" it was American English, and when it made Good and Featured prior it was a mixture. Basing a decision on any of these past items is probably a mistake as there was never anything set in stone. That's why I was hoping that a whole heap of wiki space editors could come up with a newer reason and consensus for one version or the other. [[User:Fyunck(click)|Fyunck(click)]] ([[User talk:Fyunck(click)|talk]]) 04:42, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

::::::::::::But what reason could there possibly be to prefer one over the other? And why not Ozzie? The only reason for preference would be whichever orthography the article was originally written in, which it appears we can't agree on. I mean, if we can't even tell the difference, how important can it be? If we want a later reason, then I suppose we could go with the ''Dawn'' mission sources, which are presumably largely in American English. But the article was already well developed by the time of ''Dawn''. [[User:Kwamikagami|— kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 08:51, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

::::::::::::What I propose is that whoever contributes to the article writes however they choose. And the rest of us leave it alone and stop quibbling over trivia. I mean, if it reached GA and FA as a mixture of orthographies, that's evidently good enough. [[User:Kwamikagami|— kwami]] ([[User talk:Kwamikagami|talk]]) 08:53, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

:::::::::::::No. An inconsistent article is a crappy article. EEng's proposal is better. [[User:Dondervogel 2|Dondervogel 2]] ([[User talk:Dondervogel 2|talk]]) 10:22, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

*Would there be anything wrong, since all the parties seem friendly and cooperative and no violence has yet broken out on this trivial matter, with y'all saving further time investment by agreeing to have a neutral and utterly (I assure you) disinterested party (me) flip a coin and tell y'all the result? Heads = Br, Tails = Am. OK? [[User:EEng#s|<b style="color:red;">E</b>]][[User talk:EEng#s|<b style="color:blue;">Eng</b>]] 23:12, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

*:I support {{u|EEng}}'s excellent - if somewhat unconventional - proposal. If his coin flip yields Tails I pledge to reverse my preference to US English. [[User:Dondervogel 2|Dondervogel 2]] ([[User talk:Dondervogel 2|talk]]) 23:30, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

*:: Apparently you and I are the only sensible ones here. [[User:EEng#s|<b style="color:red;">E</b>]][[User talk:EEng#s|<b style="color:blue;">Eng</b>]] 20:25, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

*:: In case it is unclear to others, EEng is an honourable editor and his proposal is a serious one. He and I often disagree on substance, but I respect him because he edits with the highest ethical standards. If he says he would flip a coin, he would, and I trust him to report the result fairly. I contend there is no better way to resolve this dispute. [[User:Dondervogel 2|Dondervogel 2]] ([[User talk:Dondervogel 2|talk]]) 10:48, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

*::: We're like a UN peacekeeping force. We tried. [[User:EEng#s|<b style="color:red;">E</b>]][[User talk:EEng#s|<b style="color:blue;">Eng</b>]] 21:15, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

*::::Or United Planets perhaps, with headquarters on Venus? [[User:Dondervogel 2|Dondervogel 2]] ([[User talk:Dondervogel 2|talk]]) 21:43, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

*::::: Venus is good. Has real atmosphere. [[User:Hawkeye7|<span style="color:#800082">Hawkeye7</span>]] [[User_talk:Hawkeye7|<span style="font-size:80%">(discuss)</span>]] 22:29, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

{{closed rfc bottom}}