Template talk:Infobox zodiac sign

message: what are the suggested sources for these?
 Zodiac Element: 	
 Zodiac Quality: 	
 Body Part: 	
 Domicile: 	
 Detriment: 	
 Exaltation: 	
 Fall: 	
 Birthstone: 	
 Colours: 	
 Numbers: 	
 Day: 	
 Gemstones: 	
 Metal: 	
I mean, it is far from clear that a zodiacal sign should have any of these, or that there should be any kind of agreement on the association. Each of these needs to be attributed to authors and justified, which cannot be done in an infobox. I suggest we remove these items from the template, and people who wish to discuss them can do so in prose, in the article body, citing their references. dab (𒁳) 14:53, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not only for sources, but I'm wondering about the significance of any of it. Wikidan829 14:57, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Things like quality, domicile, element, etc., are widely agreed upon and have been for some time. Others like number and birthstone I'm sure is chosen at the whim of the author and haven't developed a consensus over time as the others have. These fields would be better off deleted from the template. — Sam 16:13, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: yes, I think this is right. Things attributed with the signs since the Renaissance seem to be stable enough to list matter-of-factly. The history of this needs to be made clear on Astrological sign of course. If we are really charitable, we can count this section's reference to William Lilly as "attribution". But no mention is made of  Birthstones, Numbers, Gemstones, Body Parts or Metals. If these are stable associations (say, pre-17th century), I suggest this be discussed at the astrological sign, upon which we can re-include them here. dab (𒁳) 16:33, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is also no discussion of Days or Numbers.  I'm going to remove these as well, and they can be readded in the off chance that they are both nonarbitrary and become discussed in the astrological sign article. -Todd(Talk-Contribs) 10:47, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

message: What are these supposed to signify?  At a glance they look like they may be referring to the astronomical constellations of the same names as the signs, but those are problematic not least because of Ophiucus, which is a constellation but not a sign and creates a gap in the dates; also, the values given in the articles don't quite match the astronomical-constellation dates in Zodiac.  We have the sidereal and tropical sign dates, and those are actually used in astrology.  There is no "Solar" zodiac in astrology, so at the very least the name of this item in the box is confusing; and the data in it appears to correspond to astronomical constellations, which are irrelevant in this context.  Would it be okay to remove this item from the box? 216.75.183.126 (talk) 02:47, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No response after a week; I'm deleting it. 216.75.183.126 (talk) 15:32, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Birth dates (Solar)? 

message: Hey all of the zodiac elements in the box change when you update another sign with (example) water. Is there a way to fix this? CarrsoLO (talk) 13:32, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Zodiac elements 

message: the dates for scorpio are incorrect. The real dates are October 23rd - November 21st.
:I believe that would need to be changed on this page. --DA Skunk - (talk) 21:17, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  {{tlx|editsemiprotected}} 

message: Fall of Virgo should be Venus therefore Moon is wrong.
Exaltation should be Mercury therefore Venus is wrong.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.69.96.79 (talk) 00:45, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong information in the Virgo zodiac sign box 

message: Why are the headings for "symbol", "element", and "quality" prefixed with the word "zodiac"?  It appears to be meaningless in this context.  There is no other kind of symbol, element, or quality that these might be confused with, and it is not common usage among the people who use these terms to add "zodiac" in front of them...  astrologers don't say "the zodiac element of this sign is so-and-so".  They just talk about symbols and elements and qualities.  If someone thought it important to add an adjective to distinguish, let's say, this kind of element from the chemical kind of element, then it might be more appropriate to use the word "astrological"; but I'd suggest just changing the headngs to "Symbol", "Element", and "Quality" without qualification. 128.100.5.116 (talk) 19:45, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Hearing nothing, I'm going to remove the extra words. 216.59.249.202 (talk) 05:42, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

text: Oh, looks like I can't.  Well, someone ought to. 216.59.249.202 (talk) 05:43, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Zodiac" 

message: I believe that the exaltaition and the fall for this article have been put in the wrong order. The reason is simple, Uranus cannot be the exaltation for Pisces as it is an unstable planet and Pisces is mutable, and second, the Moon is Cancer's domicile, which means that it is automatically compatible with Pisces. Therefore, the fall should be Uranus and the exultation should be MoonSKLADUM 13:07, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Switch 

message: Okay, I made an error with the post above. I thought I was on Pisces but i was really on Scorpio. My apologies. --SKLADUM 13:14, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Correction 

message: The template should have the adjective version of each sign, the ones I frequently see are:
#Arian
#Taurean
#Geminian
#Cancerian
#Leonine
#Virgoan
#Libran
#Scorpionic
#Sagittarian
#Capricornian
#Aquarian
#Piscean
My suggestion is to put it between "Constellation" and "Element". --IdLoveOne (talk) 14:45, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adjective terms 

message: (Moved from here.)
Natcrimson1997 07:21, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: We would be happy to help - can you tell us what mistakes need correcting? Since we do not know what to fix yet, this is . Avicennasis @ 08:29, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from Natcrimson1997, 17 April 2010 

message: (Moved from here.)
"Scorpio (astrology)"  The dates for "Duration (Sidereal Hindu)" are wrong it should be "16 November to 15 December" not "13 November to 6 December".
Sources:
http://www.articlesbase.com/astrology-articles/scorpio-astrology-learn-about-the-star-sign-scorpio-from-the-zodiac-2101469.html
http://www.zimbio.com/Astrology/articles/6391852/Astrology+Sidereal+Zodiac
Sharp88 (talk) 19:11, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: The dates are mathematically calculated in the template , not manually specified.  If the calculations in that template are incorrect, please discuss it on that template's talk page. --Darkwind (talk) 21:59, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

text: Edit to add: you may also want to take it up with User talk:Dbachmann, the user who created the template, as he's the most likely person to know how to fix it. --Darkwind (talk) 22:01, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from Sharp88, 17 April 2010 

message: You have the the duration wrong for this Zodiac sign.  You have 20 March – 20 April, which is the duration for Aries.
For Scorpio, it should read: October 23 - November 21.
Kobrakai75 (talk) 12:23, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Reverted. Thanks. -Atmoz (talk) 17:09, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from Kobrakai75, 10 January 2011 

message: According to astronomers, the earth is in a different spot in relation to the sun than it was 3,000 years ago when the study of astrology first began and the 12 zodiac signs were assigned different times of the year.
Gemini: June 21- July 20
Nsuljic (talk) 14:48, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. Logan Talk Contributions 15:57, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from Nsuljic, 14 January 2011 

message: Dear Sir,
In the column here on the right side it is wrongly mentioned that the period is from 21st March till 20th April. It should be 21 April till 20th May, please see to it and please correct it.
Kind Regards
Gunish  
Gunishincroatia (talk) 10:55, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Topher385 (talk) 20:39, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from Gunishincroatia, 13 August 2011