Talk:List of solar eclipses in the 21st century

message: THERE IS A 1988 TOTAL SOLAR ECLIPSE!
PLEASE TAKE NOTE OF THIS! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 210.213.127.192 (talk • contribs) 02:23, June 22, 2006 (UTC).
:You are correct.  When I last updated this page, I went back only to the 1990's.  I have the information on the 1988 eclipse, if I ever get around to adding more.  (I'm not sure how far back we want to go, as the list could get awfully long).  It's also at NASA's website, listed in the External Links.  --Spiffy sperry 16:47, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: 1988

message: Didn't a solar eclipse happen in Northern Scotland? I remember seeing one around the 1990's. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.62.178.53 (talk) 00:58, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scotland 

message: can a eclipse occur in the carribean and if why hasn't one occure and why is it not scheduled to  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.131.162.188 (talk) 21:48, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  what about the carribean 

message: Why are there internal links to some countries/locations and not to others?  It may not be appropriate to have internal links attached to any of these location names, but I care less that than I do about the general issue of consistency: I really think that either (1) all country or location names should have internal links, or (2) no country or location names should have internal links.  It's strange to have internal links to some locations and not others.
Also, is it really appropriate that all of the dates and years be internal links?  Maybe someone can refer me to the Wikipedia authoring guidelines on this issue of internal links; I'm a little confused as to when it is appropriate to use an internal link and when it is not.  But I do believe there should be consistency, and that seems to be lacking in this article.
Jmjanzen (talk) 15:51, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Just for the record, in the version of the article which went through FAL (which is later than the version you are referring to), all of the countries/locations were wiki-linked. However, since then  has removed some of the links, stating "Delink common terms. See: wp:overlink". Mike Peel (talk) 11:08, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Internal Links 

message: I've removed the following from the introduction:
: The eclipse of 21 August 2017 will be the first total eclipse visible from the contiguous United States since 1979, and the total eclipse of 8 April 2024 will be the first to be seen in Mexico since 1991 and the second total eclipse to be seen from parts of southeastern Missouri, southern Illinois and southwestern Kentucky in only 6 2/3 years.
I've removed it for two reasons. First, it is unreferenced. Second, it is heavily biased towards the Americas. I should note that I put the paragraph together from the notes listed in the old version of the table. Mike Peel (talk) 14:02, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed paragraph 

message: What time zone is the schedule referencing? If it could be noted somewhere that would be helpful.68.9.133.244 (talk)
: Good point; I've added it to the article. It's in Universal Time. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 14:06, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Should there be column telling the "starting time" and the "ending time" of eclipses. Verycuriousboy (talk) 04:55, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  A bit tricky. You could give the earliest and latest time "anywhere on earth", but it won't have much meaning for any specifical location of viewing. Tom Ruen (talk) 05:06, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  question about time and chart 

message: I'm not sure about all the table magic here, but this article seems to take 2+ minutes to display on my computer! And its not internet speed, but InternetExplorer is actually pegging my 2.8Ghz CPU for this time! What the heck is it doing?! SockPuppetForTomruen (talk) 04:18, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I concur, this page takes a long time to load on my browser (IE) as well. ~AH1(TCU) 23:42, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  SLOW PAGE

message: I don't know how solid/good a set of sources this article is based on, or whether the footnote on this page is adequate citation for adding an event?:
http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2010/17dec_solsticeeclipse/
   "Fortunately we won't have to wait 372 years for the next one [next eclipse during northern winter solstice]...that will be on 2094 DEC 21."  
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Hugovdm (talk • contribs) 21:47, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  2094? 

message: Of these, two annular and one total eclipse will be off-centre,[1] in the sense that the path of the maximum eclipse will only touch Earth's surface rather than traversing it.[2]
* This text seems to be worded as if the "path of maximum eclipse" is something that exists in space and happens to intersect the Earth at certain point(s), which I don't understand. In that case, wouldn't the point of "maximum eclipse" be the point on the surface of the Moon directly opposite the Sun?
* If "path of maximum eclipse" is somehow a path in space, then the case of it "only touching" the Earth's surface would almost certainly be an exceptional case that essentially would never (exactly) happen. 
* The table has a column called "location" which is described as showing the point of maximum eclipse. This location is defined for all eclipses, not just three. So, it would seem from this that the "path of maximum eclipse" always is just a point and not a path on Earth's surface.
*In any case, I can't see what any of this has to do with the eclipse being "off-centre".
Basically, I don't understand any of this stuff at all, and, even if I am also being slow, I don't think it is clearly enough explained. 86.169.185.197 (talk) 22:48, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, this was poorly worded and I have changed it. All that is meant is that the exact center of the moon's shadow misses the surface of the earth. Typically the center of the shadow is where the eclipse is longest along any part of its path. A solar eclipse is only central if the axis of the moon's shadow traverses the surface of the earth. In rare cases the axis can miss the earth but part of the shadow still covers the earth. Hope this helps.  — TimL • talk 04:13, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Can't understand this part 

message: is deprecated. Would someone please convert the sortkeys in the table to the new format suggested on Template:Sort Nowrap? This will also address some of the load-time problems as it will reduce the number of transclusions to be parsed on this page. Deryck C. 11:12, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sort nowrap 

message: I think there should be a separate table of total eclipses only,
or perhaps some way of sorting for totals only.
(If I sort on type, the chronological order is messed up!)
I'm willing to work on this, but I don't add such a table and have it reverted.
Tripodics (talk) 14:04, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree that List of total solar eclipses in the 21st century should be created; it has the notability as a standalone subject separate from partial eclipses. PK-WIKI (talk) 15:21, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Table of total eclipses. 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:List of solar eclipses in the 16th century which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 04:49, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress 

message: 77 + 73 + 68 + 7 = 225, not 224. 2001:569:7E68:8100:A181:463C:6149:7AD3 (talk) 14:52, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: You're correct.  I tracked down the edit that introduced this error (from December 2020) and fixed it. --Spiffy sperry (talk) 16:20, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Total doesn't tally 

message: The row for Solar eclipse of April 20, 2023 currently says:
Hybrid: Indonesia, Australia, Timor-Leste
Partial: Japan, Southeast Asia, East Indies, Philippines, New Zealand
The article for that eclipse says:
:Totality for this eclipse was visible in the North West Cape peninsula and Barrow Island in Western Australia, eastern parts of East Timor, as well as Damar Island and parts of the province of Papua in Indonesia.
Our coverage of "hybrid" (annular/total) eclipse would be improved by breaking down the totality, annular, and partial locations like so:
Total: North West Cape peninsula and Barrow Island in Western Australia, eastern parts of East Timor, etc.
Annular: Locations where annular was seen, etc.
Partial: Japan, Southeast Asia, East Indies, Philippines, New Zealand
PK-WIKI (talk) 21:17, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hybrid should be broken down into Total + Annular locations