Talk:Extrasolar planets in fiction

"Cetians" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Cetians has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 4 § Cetians until a consensus is reached. TompaDompa (talk) 00:00, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

"Stars and planetary systems in fiction" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Stars and planetary systems in fiction has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 6 § Stars and planetary systems in fiction until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 19:53, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Extrasolar planets in fiction/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: TompaDompa (talk · contribs) 00:39, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Sammi Brie (talk · contribs) 06:37, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate. a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

Your prose style leads to larger, denser paragraphs that occasionally get very clumpy and need to be broken up. A couple of paragraph breaks are the biggest thing you need. As always, amply cited with great SF refs. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 07:08, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

Did you know? If you fancy doing so, I always have plenty of GA nominees to review. Just look for the all-uppercase titles in the Television section. Reviews always appreciated.

Copy changes

There are some long paragraphs in some of the sections, and reading may be aided by introducing paragraph breaks.

I mean, the longest paragraph (in the "In multiple star systems" section) is 440 words. That's a relatively lengthy paragraph, but by no means is it unreadably long. If I thought there were good/natural places to split the longest paragraphs I might do that, but as it stands I would kind of have to rewrite them a fair bit for the end result not to be rather awkward. TompaDompa (talk) 10:24, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

Lead

• Most of these fictional planets do not differ significantly from the Earth, and serve only as settings for the narrative. Remove unneeded comma (WP:CINS)
  • Done. TompaDompa (talk) 10:24, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

In multiple star systems

• Isaac Asimov's 1941 short story "Nightfall" portrays a planet which is in constant daylight from at least one of its six suns for millennia at a time before a single night of true darkness, which is a much-anticipated event, the 1963 The Twilight Zone episode "On Thursday We Leave for Home" depicts a planet that is challenging for humans to inhabit due to the unending heat and light from a pair of suns, and Mark Hodder's 2012 novel A Red Sun Also Rises is set on a planet where a dim red sun rises at the same time as the planet's twin white suns set. The first list entry has a comma, so the other commas should be semicolons.
  • Done. TompaDompa (talk) 10:24, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
• I want a break somewhere here but am not sure where to put it.
  • As noted above, I don't think there is really a good place to split the paragraph. TompaDompa (talk) 10:24, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

Rogue planets

• Earth is threatened by impact with a rogue planet in the 1933 novel When Worlds Collide by Edwin Balmer and Philip Wylie and its 1951 film adaptation, and becomes a rogue planet itself in Fritz Leiber's 1951 short story "A Pail of Air". Remove comma CinS
  • Added "it" after "and" instead. TompaDompa (talk) 10:24, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

Physical environment

• Consider splitting this paragraph at At the other end of the spectrum
  • I don't think that's a good idea. That sentence follows directly from the preceding one. TompaDompa (talk) 10:24, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

Sourcing and spot checks

Reviewed: 6, 9, 22, 25, 30

No issues.

Images

The three images are all libre-licensed. Alt text is supplied.

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Did you know nomination

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that the majority of extrasolar planets in fiction are inhabited by native species?

• Source: "more than half the fictional exoplanets are located in the habitable zone, are places where human characters can breathe, and are home to native life"

• ALT1: ... that extrasolar planets in fiction come in a variety of shapes, including flattened, cubic, and toroidal? Source: See the sources in the "Exotic shapes" section.
• ALT2: ... that most extrasolar planets in fiction are Earth-like, but this has become less common since real exoplanets have been discovered? Source: See the sources in the "General characteristics" section.
• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Niftski
• Comment: Plenty of other hooks could be written, if none of these seem ideal.

Improved to Good Article status by TompaDompa (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 28 past nominations.

TompaDompa (talk) 23:35, 5 January 2025 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: New enough (GA on January 5, 2025); Long enough (11061 characters); Within policy - sourced, neutral, copyvio-free (Earwig returns "Violation unlikely"); Hooks are cited and interesting; QPQ provided. This is quite an interesting read :)