Talk:Ganymede (moon)

WP:URFA/2020

Looking at this article for WP:URFA/2020 and also for a potential TFA on 2020-12-21:

• The article had three different date styles (mdy, dmy and ISO): I picked what I thought the most common and ran the script. But since Jupiter and Saturn use dmy, I wonder if the dates here should be the same.
• There are considerable duplicate links. See WP:OVERLINK, but some may be deemed necessary and retained (editor discretion). Installing this script will add an item to your toolbox that shows duplicate links in red: User:Evad37/duplinks-alt  Done
• There are MOS:SANDWICH and image layout problems everywhere. If knowledgeable editors will delete those that are least useful (decorative), I am willing to go through and improve the layout. There are considerable images here that are not aiding our understanding of the topic; by reducing those, we can get a better layout on the ones that stay.  Done
• External links probably could benefit from a trim, per WP:ELNO. FAs are supposed to be comprehensive, meaning there should be little in EL that can't be covered in the article. Do these add something to the article that we can't cover in a comprehensive article?
• The article appears to be well cited, but should be reviewed for uncited or outdated text.

SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:20, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

If I may be so bold, I'll check off ones I've tried to take care of as I find the time, here and on the other talk pages mentioned at the linked discussions - Astrophobe (talk) 23:18, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Formatting probably still needs work and the page feels a bit cramped to me, but there are no more MOS:SANDWICH issues. - Astrophobe (talk) 23:38, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

• Cite error: A list-defined reference named "cwgjupgany" is not used in the content (see the help page). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:13, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Lede is far too long.

The lede for this article should be edited down, and many of the details therein should be moved to the main body of the article, or removed completely. The lede should be a para or two, at most. Why even have sections if we're going to put all the details at the very top? 73.6.96.168 (talk) 13:43, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Per WP:LEDE it can be up to 4 paragraphs long. Ruslik_Zero 20:26, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Need better image

The current infobox image of Ganymede has been bothering me for a pretty long time now. Ganymede appears visibly squashed in the image as a result of reprojecting JunoCam's large field of view to a smaller one. Nowhere in the article is this effect mentioned, which means that this image can be misleading to readers. I propose that it should be replaced with a better-quality image like File:Ganymede JunoGill 2217.jpg, although I'm not sure how to deal with that image's watermark. File:Juno Sails by Ganymede.jpg could also be another option, though I prefer the previous image since I believe the less-saturated version is closer to Ganymede's "true color". Notifying active editors @Kwamikagami:, @Double sharp:, @Modest Genius:, and @Praemonitus:. Nrco0e (talk · contribs) 06:22, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

Any of those would be fine with me. I'm used to the more saturated appearance, but if Ganymede is greyer than that, agreed it would be better to show that in the lead img. My issue with most of these photos is the way they're clipped. IMO, best to center the moon in the image, rather than just the sunlit portion. so that one has a better idea of how much of the surface is shown. — kwami (talk) 06:32, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

Yes, something like Triton. Agree with kwami re colour. Double sharp (talk) 03:58, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

moon

moon is a work of art😍 154.97.20.12 (talk) 18:24, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

Atmosphere

Lede says Ganymede has no atmosphere, then says it has a thin oxygen atmosphere. Can these statements be reconciled? Stevebritgimp (talk) 14:05, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Yes, I noticed that too, just today when I first read this page.

What is the procedure to try and make a change? Stormbird (talk) 07:13, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

Ganymede has a surface pressure of only 1.2 μPa (10⁻¹¹ atm) so it has an Exosphere. "Atmosphere" also is also formally correct but, as with Earth's moon, with so low pressure nobody intend it as such (see Exosphere article) Pippo skaio (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 15:51, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Name globalisation

I changed the following sentence: The Galilean satellites retain the Italian spellings of their names. IMHO, there were several doubtful parts of this statement. First, the Gallilean moons have different names in different languages. Second, there was probably no original spelling to "retain", since both in the seventeenth and in the nineteenth centuries European scolars in general had linguistic capacities in more than one language, and were used to translate also proper names when switching from one language to another. (In the twentieth century, and so far in the present one, there is a more widespread opinion that "names don't translate". This thought mode seems to be fairly modern, though.) Third, actually, the English and the Italian spelling of this particular name do differ.

As you easily can find out from inspecting the names of the interwiki sisters to this article, there are quite some variations of the spelling. The nordic languages (Swedish, Danish, Norwegian, Icelandic) uses the Latin form Ganymedes (as do Czech and Dutch). Other forms include Ganymede, Ganimedes, Ganimede (which incidentally is the Italian form), and quite a lot of forms ending in -med. I guess (OR-warning!) that often the form that the mythological prince Ganymede already had in the respective language was employed. (That this at least not always could be the rule, may be seen from the English name of the largest planet in our solar system; I believe that it rather seldom is called Jove.)

(@Kwamikagami: I think you added this sentence to the article.) Regards, JoergenB (talk) 15:33, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

I don't recall writing that. I wrote that i.a. Italian and Russian use the Latin oblique as the base of their names, while i.a. English and French use the nominative. English uses the oblique for the adjectival form, thus Iris but Iridian; the latter resembles Russian Ирида and Italian Iride. Though under French influence other languages sometimes drop the final vowel or consonant, and, at least on WP-it, Italian is moving toward the IAU nominative forms for the names of their articles, with the traditional oblique form listed second as the "Italian" name. — kwami (talk) 21:04, 31 July 2024 (UTC)