Talk:Astrometry

message: An automated Wikipedia link suggester has some possible wiki link suggestions for the Astrometry article, and they have been placed on this page for your convenience.Tip: Some people find it helpful if these suggestions are shown on this talk page, rather than on another page. To do this, just add  to this page. — LinkBot 01:03, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I added the links that made sense. Edward 07:52, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Links

message: Most of the content in this page about cepheids and distance scale is not strictly astrometry, because astrometry deals with the angular distances between stars, not three-space or "physical" distances between stars.  One day I will sit down and beat this page into shape, but I don't have time right now. David W. Hogg 14:14, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed most of the offending content. David W. Hogg 18:28, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Distance scale 

message: What is the name for a person who works in the field of astronomy?  (Astrometrist?)  If anyone knows (assuming there is a name in the first place), I think it should probably be included in the article.
: It can be "Astrometer" or "Astrometrist", but really (and boringly) astrometry is done by "Astronomers".  Neither of the first two terms is used much, so I don't think it is important for the article, but I certainly don't feel strongly!  David W. Hogg 14:09, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  A person who does astrometry 

message: The word "astrometrics" is not used in the professional community much or at all. -- David W. Hogg 21:35, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed this reference -- David W. Hogg 01:05, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Astrometrics" 

message: I am not sure what astrolabes do, but
I am pretty sure they don't measure the positions of stars. -- David W. Hogg 20:38, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed this reference -- David W. Hogg 01:05, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Astrolabes? 

message: I just noticed that some of the (badly written, arguably incorrect) content on this page has been copied from copyrighted content on the site astrometry.org without citation. -- David W. Hogg 18:24, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  copyright infringement? 

message: We need to add sentences about the creation of the USNO-B1.0 catalog, which is the current gold standard in astrometry.  And maybe also the USNO-A and USNO-SA and HST Guide Star catalogs. -- David W. Hogg 01:07, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It looks like User:Lauren Greenspan has done this. -- David W. Hogg 09:48, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  USNO-B1.0 

message: User User:Lauren Greenspan and I have begun a piece-by-piece overhaul of this page. -- David W. Hogg 01:06, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  page overhaul 

message: Just a heads-up to anyone concerned: I moved the article from the main Astronomy category to Astronomical sub-disciplines, since the Astrometry category, for which this is the main page, is a sub-category of Astronomical sub-disciplines. 84.101.53.254 19:12, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category move 

message: This article seems to have lost ground a bit in its recent rewrite (or it may have been lacking from the start). There is no description as to "how" James Bradley and others (pre photography) made their measurements. The advent of photography and the Astrograph has been totally missed again. We have undefined jargon like "plate-measuring machine". 69.72.2.71 (talk) 19:59, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Missing information

message: The History section of the article currently refers to a work of Laplace's by the title Inequalities of Jupiter and Saturn's.  While this has been accurately copied from a cited source at  this web site, it is clearly incomplete.  The author of the article at the web-site might have meant either Laplace's 1785 Le mémoir sur les inégalités des planéts et des satellites or his 1786 La théorie de Jupiter et de Saturne.  I have therefore tagged the title for clarification.
—David Wilson (talk · cont) 12:59, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incomplete title 

message: While reviewing this article, I noticed that the diagram "Motion of Barycenter of solar system relative to the Sun" was a relatively poor quality gif file, the source URL was to a PhotoBucket account that is now disabled, and it was for the years 1945-1996. Therefore I created two new diagrams and uploaded them to Wikimedia for you: 1) File:Solar System Barycenter 1944-1997.png is a complete recreation of the diagram in the article with the same years and path to verify validity of my algorithms, and 2) File:Solar System Barycenter 2000-2050.png which is a more "current" diagram for the years 2000-2050. Feel free to use one or both of these public domain png files if you want to replace the older diagram. Larry McNish, Calgary Centre of the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada.
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Solar_System_Barycenter_2000-2050.png
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Solar_System_Barycenter_1944-1997.png
68.144.133.105 (talk) 12:49, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Solar System Barycenter diagram 

message: The article misses crucial historical details, fe. the Uranometria doesn't even get mentioned (also no Nebra sky disk, no Antikythera Mechanism). Instead there is a lot of sloppy second-tier information about some Muslim astronomers. While it's certainly no problem to include historical facts from different cultures, it's a bit weird to only mention those with an Islamic background. What about the Mayans and Aztecs, what about the cultures from Mesopotamia (Sumerian, Babylonian, Persian), what about ancient Egypt or India?--212.95.5.130 (talk) 16:27, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for your comments on the historical aspects. I don't think that the article is intentionally biased, but it is certainly incomplete. If you know some of the history of astrometry from other civilizations and have some sources to back it, please add it to the article. -- {Talk} 20:43, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

text: No doubt good material can be found that belongs here, but seems to me most of what you're talking about belongs more in History of astronomy. Jim.henderson (talk) 21:06, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  It's a biased mess...