Talk:Earth

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
As of 9 December 2023, this article is a good article. (compare to current). This means the community feels it is written well. You may see the discussion that promoted the article here.
This article is a good article. This means the community feels it is written well. You may see the discussion that promoted the article here.

I don't agree.[change source]

I don't agree that the Moon causing the tide belongs in Moon rather than Earth.

Most ecologists would say that there is an Earth-Moon ecological system, and that tides, and to a much lesser degree phases (which affect the light received at night, which in turn affects animal hunting patterns and etc.), are critically important in Earth ecology, and played a huge role in the evolution of life on Earth, e.g. in intertidal zones.

Earth is, more than anything else, an entity studied by ecology. Ecology divides it up into ecoregions, for instance. Ecology views it as a single homeorhetic (almost homestatic - but not quite) system. This is the most comple and useful view of the planet. Therefore it is the one we should deal with here, not just the geological perspective.

cophew : this page is indeed unsimple. the first bit is ok but the second bit is not simple enough. it could do with more interwiki-links.

They could have a few more picture examples.Jwebbxsjado1 22:23, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Liquid water may exist on Mars, and on Europa.

99.239.215.193 (talk) 20:00, 27 March 2011 (UTC)Ed Gregory[reply]

Vandalism[change source]

Problems in the first scentence— Preceding unsigned comment added by Iamtim (talk • contribs)

Problem[change source]

It seems to say that Theia made the Milky way, but this is wrong, it made the moon.

Thanks. I have fixed it. Next time, you are encouraged to be bold. EhJJTALK 02:37, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PGA comments[change source]

  • It is often called The Earth, Planet Earth, the World Terra, and home. - needs a ref
 Fixed Pmlineditor 15:03, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Earth is the only place in the universe where life has been confirmed to exist. - needs ref. It could be possible, that there are other planets in the univers with life.
 Fixed Pmlineditor 15:21, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't really think that this needs a ref (the enWP FA doesn't have one). Anyways,  Fixed Pmlineditor 15:51, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • This oxygen also formed the ozone layer which protects the Earth from bad ultraviolet radiation from the Sun. This protection made it possible for things to move from the deep ocean to the surface. - We are protected from radiation and cosmic radiation by a magnetic field.
Please clarify. Pmlineditor 17:25, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Tectonic Plates - without any ref
 Fixed Added two refs. Pmlineditor 17:12, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • wouldn't - no short cuts, please
 Fixed Pmlineditor 15:30, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is called the greenhouse effect - This is called natural greenhouse effect
 Fixed Pmlineditor 17:01, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • It might be very dangerous for life on Earth if this continues. - needs ref
 Fixed Pmlineditor 10:43, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • convection currents - why in italics?
 Fixed Couldn't do this yourself, could you? Pmlineditor 15:27, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No, because it could have a reason, that this was in italics. Barras (talk) 15:30, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, :/ Pmlineditor 16:04, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Earth takes about 24 hours to rotate or spin around once. This is called a day. Earth takes roughly 365 days to go around the Sun. This is called a year. - redundancy to the introduction.
 Fixed Shortened that part to prevent redundancy. Pmlineditor 15:25, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Only six people in history have ever seen the other side of the Moon. - which ones and ref
 Fixed Removed. Pmlineditor 17:01, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's it Barras (talk) 19:36, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

More comments by Barras[change source]

Lead

--Barras (talk) 16:56, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

History
  • Some scientists think that the Moon might have been made when a small planet, sometimes called Theia, crashed into Earth and bit broke off - becoming the Moon. - A very long sentence.
     Fixed Pmlineditor 17:10, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Some life developed photosynthesis which lets plants make food from the Sun's light. - They do not only use the sun power, they use also water.
     Fixed Pmlineditor 17:08, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • This long ago almost all land was in one place, called a supercontinent. - sounds a bit odd, imo. and supercontinent shouldn't be in italics.
     Fixed Pmlineditor 17:08, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Scientists think that soon after this there was a time when the Earth was almost entirely covered by glaciers. - because of scientists think, it needs a ref.
     Fixed Pmlineditor 17:15, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

--Barras (talk) 17:05, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Shape, Internal structure, Tectonic plates
  • oblate spheroid - isn't easy.
  • bulges - isn't simple.
     Fixed
  • Underneath - isn't simple.
     Fixed

--Barras (talk) 17:23, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Surface, Hydrosphere, Atmosphere, Weather, climate, and water cycle, Orbit and rotation
  • surface and cools. as it gets colder - After a full stop, capital letter.
     Fixed
  • which is made whem either - whem probably a typo?
     Fixed
  • global warming. which is not good. - first: a comma not a full stop. second: ref, because which is not good is POV.
  • layer - isn't simple
     Not done Didn't I say the same thing at Jupiter? Layer is layer. Pmlineditor 16:27, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    It isn't in a headline, and a wikt entry exist. wikt:layer. So far, it should be linked. Barras (talk) 16:30, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
     Fixed - Linked to wikt. Chenzw  Talk  09:50, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • electricity we burn things - we isn't encyclopaedic.
     Fixed
  • convection - isn't simple.
     Fixed
  • tidally locked - isn't simple
     Fixed
  • the next 10,000 years or so. - isn't encyclopaedic
     Fixed
  • Other websites should use the {{Cite web}}-template.

I think that's all for now. Barras (talk) 19:57, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments[change source]

  • There are different lists of other names in the lead and in the infobox.
     Fixed
  • Any reason why day is italicised and year is not in the lead?
     Fixed
  • "interacts " is not simple.
  • Nor is "specifically" really.
     Fixed
  • "Scientists think..." shouldn't that be "Most scientists..."?
     Fixed
  • unlink "that" from "that made the Sun".
     Fixed
  • "and bit broke off - becoming " "a part broke off — becoming" (i.e. grammar and an en-dash required here).
     Fixed
  • Infobox links AU but not km, km/s, km/h etc.
    They are linked elsewhere
    Only km is linked elsewhere. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:20, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
     Fixed Pmlineditor  Talk 17:44, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Link glacier.
     Fixed
  • "The average width of the Earth is approx. 40,000 kilometres (40,030.229 kilometres) divided by pi. This is because originally one metre was defined as one 10,000,000th of the distance from the North pole to the equator, through Paris, France.[10] " this is confusing and probably unnecessary. The definition of a metre does not really belong in this article, it belongs in the metre article. Secondly, describing the width as two different kilometre values and then dividing by pi is far from simple.
  • At least keep consistent spelling of metre and meter within the same paragraph. I'd keep consistent throughout the whole article.
     Fixed
  • "the farthest point " furthest?
     Fixed
  • "30-50 kilometres" needs an en-dash between the values and no need to relink kilometres here.
     Fixed
  • "the outer core may be as much as 7000 degrees" - "the temperature of the outer core may be as high as 7,000 degrees Celsius".
     Fixed
  • "Main article: plate tectonics" Capital P for Plate here please.
     Fixed
  • "According to plate tectonics the Earth's crust " doesn't make too much sense. Perhaps "Because of plate tectonics, the Earth's crust..."
     Fixed
  • No references for the definitions and examples of different plate boundaries.
     Fixed We already have that.
  • What are "fault lines "?
     Fixed
  • Plural of plateau is plateaux.
     Fixed
  • No need to relink Plate tectonics in the Surface section.
     Fixed
  • "and global warming. which is not good." presumably something needs to be done about this follow-on sentence!
     Fixed
  • Water cycle caption does not need a full stop.
     Fixed
  • convection currents[21] - missing [[full stop before the ref.
     Fixed
  • Is "average" simple?
     Fixed
  • "tidally locked " isn't simple - at least link tide.
     Fixed
  • Refs 11, 16-19, 21-23 need accessdates. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:08, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are three disambiguation pages linked to:

Designations section of the infobox has now disappeared. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:44, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Fixed

Orbit, day length &c[change source]

This section is one long hostage to fortune, with no supporting refs. Writers should know that day length used to be much shorter, moon much closer, and tides much higher. 620 million years ago: the day was 21.9±0.4 hours, and there were 13.1±0.1 synodic months/year and 400±7 solar days/year. Put simply, the moon and the earth act as brakes on each other (gravity, right?). The effect of the braking is to slow the orbiting of the moon and the spinning of the Earth. The moon already shows only one face to the Earth: that is a result of the braking effect, and is called en:Tidal locking. Yes, tides were higher, atmosphere more turbulent, volcanos belched, and life was quite all right, thank you. Big brother enWP has info on en:Tidal acceleration, and a summary on en:Earth. The en:Panglossian 'all is for the best in the best of all possible worlds' just means we happened to evolve when the conditions are as they are! Macdonald-ross (talk) 19:17, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Article comments[change source]

  • Need page numbers for references 14 and 15
  • I'm conflicted: the lead says ...goes around the Sun roughly once every 365.25 days, while the "Orbit and rotation" section says ...365 days to complete a year Which is it?
     Fixed Pmlineditor (t · c · l) 12:20, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Article should be in better shape when these are addressed. Albacore (talk · changes) 21:17, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have fixed some of your concerns and will look at the others later. Regards, Pmlineditor (t · c · l) 12:20, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

First sentence[change source]

I think the first sentence reads as very peculiar. If one says "The Earth is the planet we live on", that is simpler and better. Macdonald-ross (talk) 18:46, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In some places, the article has the Earth and in others Earth. I suggest changing every occurrence to Earth so the word is treated like all the other planets, making the page consistent. Thrasymedes (talk) 09:26, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I agree we should be consistent, but which way? The article uses the definite article about 50 times, and plain Earth a couple of times. I think the general everyday usage is to say "the Earth", so I would say that should be the preferred usage. Otherwise, some of the sentences will read as ever so slightly alien. English wiki does it without the definite article, but on our wiki we need to be more sensitive to our audience. I think we should wait & see whether others have an opinion. If others think you're right, then go ahead. Macdonald-ross (talk) 10:26, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Undiscussed changes[change source]

An editor has made a huge number of undiscussed changes to this page. They are on the lines of removing all technical terms from the article and replacing them with SE words. In general I object to uncontrolled changing of 'good' pages without discussion. Simple English is very weak on science terms (it was invented nearly a century ago). Our science pages must remain true to science, else they lose all credibility.

What the editor may not appreciate is that technical terms are part of the real substance of science. They are not add-ons which one can change at will. Anyone studying science at any level must learn the terms used at that level, and cutting them out of our articles makes them useless even for elementary students. We have already agreed between us that technical words should be either linked to a page where they are explained, or explained in a footnote or bracket. The whole point of a wiki is its links. Also, the "translation" into SE is largely a failure. much of the suggested language is not English: it is just a peculiar collection of SE words which do not convey the sense of the original.

What I propose is:

  1. Revert to original page
  2. Carefully examine all uses of technical words to see how essential they are. Translate those into SE providing that does not damage the sense of the concept. I think this has to be done carefully by people who understand the subject-matter. Macdonald-ross (talk) 08:52, 4 January 2014
I disagree, obviously. The only thing that would make this Wiki lose credibility would be wholesale inclusion of technical English, at which point it simply functions as a POVfork/duplicate of the English Wiki and should be remerged. (See, e.g., longitude of the ascending node, which is not so much a Simple English article as a cut-and-paste stub of a technical English article with the explanatory math stripped out.)
That said, absolutely, the intro pages overstated the extent to which you guys are actually committed to using Basic English, I overdid it by a long sight, and I've already started emending my edits accordingly. The inclusion of "people", "know", "planet", "volcano", etc. are both helpful and (apparently) perfectly appropriate. If you see other places where the simplified vocabulary actually interferes with the concept under discussion, go ahead and fix it. (Although personally, I'd still prefer we gloss things that don't show up in the first few thousand English words at least once and not take them for granted as the old version had it.) — LlywelynII 16:35, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's just that some concepts cannot be handled in SE alone. Scientific terminology is very precise, and that's because it needs to be. Where there is a conflict, an encyclopedia must go for accuracy. Basic English is good, but it does not handle all topics equally well. Its vocabulary is weakest on modern science. Macdonald-ross (talk) 10:46, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup/Additions[change source]

While we're discussing additions, though, the stuff you mentioned above about the earlier characteristics of the Earth (shorter days, faster rotation, higher tides, &c) would be great additions to the history and orbit sections if you can source them. — LlywelynII 16:39, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

People section[change source]

This section featured some of the most useless content I have ever seen. It was badly written, unencyclopedic and factually wrong in places. It has obviously suffered death by a thousand edits. How ignorant can you get if you think what we did with domesticated animals was to train them... The language went all round the houses to say things which were in the end quite unclear. I've left the last sentence as it was, but I don't think it is encyclopedic either. What is the evidence for it? Why say it at all? Macdonald-ross (talk) 18:42, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

About 74% of the surface of Earth is covered by liquid or frozen water[change source]

I improved... About 74% of the surface of Earth is covered by liquid or frozen water. 2601:580:102:383C:C10B:F5D8:6514:6576 (talk) 17:49, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Circumference[change source]

There must be a section explaining the circumference of the Earth because it is a part of the Geodesy.

--Soumya-8974 (talk) 12:15, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Pseudo-science?[change source]

I came across:

"The large mass of the Sun makes Earth move around it, just as the mass of Earth makes the moon move around it".

I'm sure this is not acceptable, because it it not a complete explanation. It is not used in En wiki, where they have a lengthier, but more correct, explanation. Orbital spin is the bit missed out. We must find a better wording or the article would be delisted from GA. This is just a formal notice so others can join in. Macdonald-ross (talk) 09:01, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see it's already delisted, or never was promoted. Curious. I've taken down the symbol. Macdonald-ross (talk) 09:10, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

infobox too large[change source]

The infobox is so wide that it limits the space which should be available for the intro section of prose. It should be made less wide, or it may be placed centrally with prose above and below it. Readability of prose goes down as line length gets too large or too short. Macdonald-ross (talk) 11:24, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not everyone has wide screen access, and this page has too wide an infobox, squashing the text on usual size screens. Macdonald-ross (talk)

"The Sun must have moved through areas where supernovae had previously exploded. "[change source]

Is it correct to say that "The Sun must have moved through areas where supernovae had previously exploded"? Or did the Sun form in an area like this originally? Presumably, either could be correct, but the article shouldn't say this unless it is known. Lights and freedom (talk) 14:39, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, absolutely it's correct! Building higher elements is what supernovae do. They are the only known source. [see En wiki "Supernova nucleosynthesis"]
The Sun is known to be moving quite fast through its stellar area. Its motion in the galaxy has been known before the existence of galaxies was known! Macdonald-ross (talk) 08:53, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
On the Direction and Velocity of the Motion of the Sun, and Solar System. By William Herschel, LL.D. F.R.S. Read May 16, 1805.

I'll make some additions to our sources on this page. Macdonald-ross (talk) 08:53, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The page on Simple which deals with this is Formation and evolution of the Solar System. Macdonald-ross (talk) 11:47, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Parallel with the moon?[change source]

I've removed the parallel where the Earth's orbit includes a reference to the Moon's orbit. The Moon's orbit is fundamentally different because it is locked (tidal locking). Macdonald-ross (talk) 08:43, 7 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments[change source]

It's certainly possible to have many more references, but we also have to think about what the page looks like to the average reader. Our readers are often schoolchildren whose teachers rarely give their sources. However, we perhaps overdo this here, and the page could do with more attention to sources. Macdonald-ross (talk) 19:13, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The requirements say that all info coming from a source should have that source added. I would assume someone got this info from a source, so it should be sourced. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:34, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I will try to help with sourcing it if I have time. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:35, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've added two sources to the end of the page. Is there any other section needing sources? Macdonald-ross (talk) 10:16, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Earth&oldid=9341113"