Talk:List of adjectivals and demonyms of astronomical bodies

message: if this isn't on Wiktionary, someone should copy it there. 76.66.193.224 (talk) 08:46, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: This list begins with explanatory information beyond the basic list information usually found in Wiktionary.  I found exactly one list of demonyms in English Wiktionary: http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Appendix:French_demonyms. -- Wavelength (talk) 15:25, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: You should examine how much prose is in some of those Wiktionary appendices, sometimes there is alot, like with wikt:Appendix:Numbers 76.66.193.224 (talk) 06:56, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

text: I copied less obvious ones, and also the ones of the larger moons, but to individual articles. — kwami (talk) 08:09, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wiktionary 

message: User:Wavelength edited Earthly in the table to earthly.  When I put earthly into the list I capitalized it to conform with the capitalization of Lunar, which indicated to me that entries in the list should all be capitalized whether they are routinely capitalized in ordinary writing or not.  Either lunar should be written with a small initial letter or earthly should be capitalized to be consistent.  Which should it be?  --Fartherred (talk) 04:23, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Both words should be uncapitalized (earthly and lunar).—Wavelength (talk) 05:03, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

text: Probably either could be capitalized to emphasize that they're referring to the worlds rather than having their more commonplace meanings, but usually they're both uncapitalized. — kwami (talk) 05:35, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: As I take stock of the discussion so far, it seems that kwami has no strong objection to lower case initials for both and Wavelength definitely favors lower case.  I also favor lower case and, since we are determining the style of the box rather than following the style, I will put lunar in lower case as an interim condition pending further discussion.  --Fartherred (talk) 14:53, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Now we come to the case of capitalizing moon and making it a name for Earth's moon.  Both the capitalization of moon and the importation of Luna from Latin to serve as the name of Earth's moon are modern inventions.  In Shakespeare's works moon was not capitalized.  Diana, Cotys, Cynthia, Hecate, Lat, Luna, Minerva and Selene are potential names for Earth's moon.  Each of these was at some time a goddess in some way associated with the moon.  The ancient Europeans were apparently fond of making the moon a goddess.  For my part I would be happy to call Earth's moon anything, including Lateforsupper, if only people would agree to give it a name other than Moon.  I have occasion to refer to Luna with respect to planets and asteroids in the case of potential future economic development.  I would rather avoid confusing Moon with the moon of some other planet.  However, it seems against policy for Wikipedia to take up my cause and promote Luna as a name for Earth's moon.  So we are stuck with a capitalized Moon in the box as best representing current practice.  --Fartherred (talk) 16:24, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Capitalization of earthly and lunar 

message: * See talk:532 Herculina#demonym
*: Nicole Sharp (talk) 16:33, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Herculinan? 

message: I think Earthican should be added as a demonym for Earth. It's what Earthlings are called in the year 3000, according to Futurama. I feel like that show is iconic enough to add a word to the lexicon. Tomjoad187 (talk) 01:21, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Earthican

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on List of adjectivals and demonyms of astronomical bodies. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090425125638/http://astrobiology.nasa.gov/ask-an-astrobiologist/question/?id=2971 to http://astrobiology.nasa.gov/ask-an-astrobiologist/question/?id=2971
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100620002838/http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/news/newsreleases/newsrelease20050118-2/ to http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/news/newsreleases/newsrelease20050118-2/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110815072223/http://dtek.tv/281-tragedies-hamlet-and-antony-cleopatra to http://dtek.tv/281-tragedies-hamlet-and-antony-cleopatra
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:57, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: A very large number of these are words that are never actually used. Do we really need an article for these? Geoffrey.landis (talk) 19:13, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. I think we should go through ever entry which does not have a reference to at least one person every having used that adjective. Otherwise it's just a list of examples of Latin and Greek conjugation. But I'll wait a week or two for opinions and for people to add references, before I some serious weeding. Fcrary (talk) 22:43, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: We certainly do not need this article. It should be deleted quickly, before the Rigelians discover it and ridicule us. Eric talk 13:53, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Do we need listings for words that aren't actually used?