Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Constellations
I've created an article for Monoceros according to the template here. Any suggestions on how to improve the template? I must have missed quite a lot of things. --Lorenzarius 14:04 Jan 20, 2003 (UTC)
Useful links --Lorenzarius
- http://www.astro.wisc.edu/~dolan/constellations/
- http://dph1701.tripod.com/astronomy/constellations.html
- http://www.astronomical.org/constellations/obs.html
- http://www.seds.org/Maps/Stars_en/Fig/const.html
I've created a program for drawing celestial maps of high quality. Originally it was made for h2g2 but it's free software, so it may be useful for this project. It's called PP3. I added such a map to Leo. --Torsten Bronger 00:40 Feb 13, 2003 (UTC)
- Excellent map! It is so clear and detailed. If you have the time, please upload the maps for the other constellations. --Lorenzarius 07:55 Feb 13, 2003 (UTC)
- Thank you. Do you think the colours/font size/whatever are okay? At the moment I still can change everything. I (think I) optimised it for Wikipedia, but e.g. on a dark background, I could include the real colours of the stars. See an alternative map for an example. Which constellations should have highest priority? --Torsten Bronger 01:32 Feb 14, 2003 (UTC)
I've prepared the following charts: Big Bear, Orion, Lion, Berenice's Hair, Monoceros, Cetus, Taurus, and Ara.
Tell me if other entry are finished or in preparation and need a map. And tell me if I have to modify something in the maps. --Torsten Bronger 13:29 Feb 15, 2003 (UTC)
- Well done, the maps fit very well into the articles. But IMO it is better to use the official names of the constellations instead of their English names. Since the IAU names are what people usually used.
- With the white background the black stars are shown very clearly. However, showing the real colours of the stars will make the maps more informative, but I wonder if doing so will make the stars less clear.
- The map of Ursa Major shows only the big dipper, can you change so that the whole constellation is displayed? Also if the maps are too wide then they can't be placed next to the table (just like the map of Cetus), I think a width around 440 will be good. --Lorenzarius 11:32 Feb 16, 2003 (UTC)
- I've updated Ursa Major, now with bigger area and latin names. Cetus will follow, probably yet today. Unfortunately we now haven't the same scale for all images anymore. But this wouldn't be possible anyway. -- Torsten Bronger 15:50 Feb 16, 2003 (UTC)
Originally posted on my Talk page by Alan Peakall
- Great work on the constellations! However, as Ursa Major appears in my browser, the sky map is overwriting the left hand side of the attribute table when there is insufficient width. I think the table should overwrite sky map under this condition. Is this known? easy to fix? -- Alan Peakall 15:27 Feb 17, 2003 (UTC)
- I think this happens when the viewer is using a lower screen resolution like 800x600 (I'm using 1024x768 so it doesn't happen to be). The only method I can think of is to move the map to the bottom of the page so the map and the table is not displayed side by side. Are there any other better methods? (This is not a big problem actually, but I feel that it looks better to display the map on the top of the page and just next to the table.) --Lorenzarius 10:27 Feb 18, 2003 (UTC)