Talk: CelestialBody

Back to template

Revised Template

I was toying around with some wikipedia templates and converted one for use here. It has the same fields, just presented differently. I wanted to bounce it off you guys before I implemented it -- what do you think? (edit -- forgot sig) RMF 21:45, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

{{{image}}}
{{{name}}}
Astrological
Region {{{region}}}
Sector {{{sector}}}
System {{{system}}}
Suns {{{suns}}}
Moons {{{moons}}}
Physical
Primary terrain {{{terrain}}}
Points of interest {{{interest}}}
Native species {{{species}}}
Other species {{{otherspecies}}}
Societal
Official langauge {{{langauge}}}
Population {{{population}}}
Major cities {{{cities}}}
Affiliation {{{affiliation}}}
  • B-E-A-UTIFUL! ----Inmobilus 21:50, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
    • This is purdy-looking. StarNeptune 01:26, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Nice. Though I assume all the planets will be this color? -- Riffsyphon1024 05:41, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
    • Yes, that's right. I tried the template out with a number of planets and it looked fine, though obviously we can change colors again. Believe it or not, brown is one of the neutral colors [1]. Gray is even more neutral but we already overuse that with all the starship/vehicle infoboxes (which are mainly pls and plfs). I can't really take credit for this; seeing as how I merely pulled it off wikipedia and substituted different fields ;-) On a related note, I was feeling ambitious tonight and tried to play around with the skins (white text on blue, or something of the sort) as per the chat meeting, but to no avail. Skin modification is very difficult unless you know CSS, apparently. RMF 06:01, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Usage

Copy and paste this code to use the Planet template. 

{{Planet|
image=|
name=|
region=|
sector=|
system=|
suns=|
moons=|
terrain=|
interest=|
species=|
otherspecies=|
language=|
cities=|
affiliation=
}}

Species

Does the native species list belong under the "Physical" section? That doesn't see right to me. --SparqMan 06:23, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

  • I concur, that should be under societal. —Silly Dan (talk) 22:26, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
    • I think species is correct where it is. Societies are part of the evolution of a physical species, the species doesn't come from the society. That's just my two cents, so whatever. --Xwing328 22:52, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
      • This has been corrected. RMF 21:30, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Astrological?

Don't we mean "astronomical" or something there? Or is astrological used in canon (bleah)? —Silly Dan (talk) 22:26, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

  • Right now, it's at Astrographical, though obviously this can be changed. RMF 21:31, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
    • Astrographical is fine. I think I misread the example on the talk page as an example of the actual template. —Silly Dan (talk) 21:42, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Length of day/year

Maybe change these to "orbital/rotation period", like on Wikipedia (Wikipedia:Coruscant)? I think it would be more encyclopedic. - Sikon [Talk] 16:37, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

  • I agree. Changed. RMF 21:47, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Wildlife

How about a wildlife field for the non-sentient creatures that live on the planet? Could also be a place for plants etc. Not to go overboard and have a huge list in theri but I think it could be good. --Eyrezer 01:27, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

  • Or, you know, this could be added under its own "Flora and fauna" section in the actual article, where it could be explained more in-depth and not clutter up the infobox. --Imp 01:28, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
    • Yeah, it could be, but how often does that happen? --Eyrezer 01:56, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Segment Headings

Hi, I've been away for awhile but I was pleasantly surprised to see that the expanded info box that I proposed was accepted with some formatting modification (which looks excellent). I noticed that there was a discussion that seems to have lagged over the names of the segment headings. I agree with Sikon and the change from “Length of Day/Year” to “Orbital/Rotation Period” makes it sound more encyclopaedic. Further to that, I still feel that Astrometric has the right connotation of the type of information being presented ([2]), rather than "Astrographical" which refers to the imagery of astronomical things. Likewise, Planetology and Socio-political are more appropriate scientific/encyclopaedic terms than “Physical” and “Societal”. Your’s to consider... --Shiaic 01:36, 05 Feb 07 15:59, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Proposed Planet Template

Main discussion moved to: Wookieepedia:Consensus track/New planet infobox template

Fields to include

We should probably drop some of the fields in this template, and add a few new. Here's what I'm thinking

  • Remove:
    • Distance from Core (Almost no planets have this information provided)
    • Surface Water (See above)
  • Rename:
    • Number of Suns to Suns (We'd put the name of the suns here instead)
    • Major Species to Native Species (Human groups that have lived on the planet for an extended amount of time would also be counted, i.e. Naboo)
  • Discuss:
    • Population (This is pretty much a failure, as the population of planets go up and down all the time. Should we use only the last recorded number, or add all known numbers from all eras? I say remove it)

Thoughts? --Imp 08:45, 7 Aug 2005 (UTC)

  • I agree with all the above points, and would like to add:
    • Change Number of Moons to Moons (list all moon names)
    • Add Other Species, in addition to Native Species
    • Add Capital City, and possibly Other Major Cities

--Azizlight 14:44, 7 Aug 2005 (UTC)

  • The problem with the "Moons" field is that it would mess up the template in cases like Yavin, which has 23 moons. I agree with your other points. --Imp 15:13, 7 Aug 2005 (UTC)
  • What's to go in the Other species section? Nonnative, but populous species? Or creatures? In the former case, that would be impossible, especially for planets like Coruscant and Tatooine, which house thousands of different species. --Imp 22:51, 8 Aug 2005 (UTC)
  • See this is why I'd rather stay with the old infobox, as we can remove sections and add them at will depending on how much info we have. All the planets in the movies would have Distance to Core and Surface Water, but nearly nothing else. -- Riffsyphon1024 15:46, 7 Aug 2005 (UTC)
    • Other templates allow to add and remove sections as well. This is just a set of commonly used fields. Considering suns and moons... Well, nobody says one should list all the 23 moons of Yavin - that's what List of moons is for. We can have just "Moons: 23". For Onderon, for example, we can have: "Moons: Dxun and 3 more". - Sikon 16:15, 7 Aug 2005 (UTC)
  • I think it would be better to have numbers in the Suns and Moons fields, with the names (if available) listed in a section of the article. Actually, since there usually aren't a whole lot of suns, perhaps we could name the suns in the infobox, and simply give the number of moons. The number would link to a section with a title such as Orbits or Orbiting bodies which listed them all by name. This would reduce clutter in the infobox. – Aidje talk 05:02, 11 Aug 2005 (UTC)
    • This is all already in the system articles. -- Riffsyphon1024 05:04, 11 Aug 2005 (UTC)
      • Are you suggesting that we not include info about a planet's moons in the planet's article? – Aidje talk 05:11, 11 Aug 2005 (UTC)
        • No, we should include moons, but I was refering to suns. -- Riffsyphon1024 05:24, 11 Aug 2005 (UTC)
  • "Capital and Major Cities" is too long and leaves little space for the cities themselves. Maybe reduce to just "Major Cities"? - Sikon 04:41, 12 Aug 2005 (UTC)
  • Anyone opposed to removing the Population bar? --Imp 23:43, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
I'm a bit late, but population seems like a rather major bit of information to leave out. You're right that population changes, but using whatever is the most current figure (or in the case of destroyed planets like Alderaan and Carida, whatever population they had at the time of their destruction) would be an easy enough solution. 71.236.33.191 17:59, 2 April 2006 (UTC)


The Workshop

{{{image}}}
{{{name}}}
Region {{{region}}}
Sector {{{sector}}}
System {{{system}}}
Suns {{{suns}}}
Moons {{{moons}}}
Native Species {{{species}}}
Other Species {{{otherspecies}}}
Population {{{population}}}
Official Language {{{language}}}
Primary Terrain {{{terrain}}}
Capital and Major Cities {{{cities}}}
Points of Interest {{{interest}}}
Affiliation {{{affiliation}}}
  • I'll post the corrected version here based on our changes. -- Riffsyphon1024 15:51, 7 Aug 2005 (UTC)
{{{image}}}
{{{name}}}
Region {{{region}}}
Sector {{{sector}}}
System {{{system}}}
Suns {{{suns}}}
Moons {{{moons}}}
Native Species {{{species}}}
Other Species {{{otherspecies}}}
Population {{{population}}}
Official Language {{{language}}}
Primary Terrain {{{terrain}}}
Major Cities {{{cities}}}
Points of Interest {{{interest}}}
Affiliation {{{affiliation}}}

Can we go with this? --SparqMan 05:37, 4 Nov 2005 (UTC)

  • Ok to me. -- Riffsyphon1024 05:39, 4 Nov 2005 (UTC)
    • So, shall we adopt the new template now? - Sikon [Talk] 06:24, 4 Nov 2005 (UTC)
      • Yeah, since it got the ok from Riff. I'm looking forward to using it! By the way, nice work on all this, Sikon. --Azizlight 22:29, 4 Nov 2005 (UTC)


Governments

I think that we should take the source from the government infobox template, and combine it with the planet infobox. This way, instead of having to add in another infobox for planetary governments, the information will already be worked into the planet infobox. We would still keep the government infobox (obviously), but, for instance, on Naboo, while we would have native species, etc. like normal, beneath would be field for the type of government it had, who the Chief of State is, etc. I was told to propose this here instead of just adding it.--Vaklu 23:43, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

  • I know it's a bit late, but I could maybe see adding a few of these fields; at the least, add type of government. —Xwing328(Talk) 16:20, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Impoertant events

Wouldn't an 'important events' field be useful? KEJ 09:23, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

  • Imo, this is better left in the main body of the article. —Xwing328(Talk) 16:20, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Immigrated Species

Does Immigrated Species mean, say, if a group of Wookies were to move to Endor and start breeding there? --DanMat6288 01:18, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Spanish

I want Spanish language link [[es:Plantilla:Planeta]] to be included (the template page is protected). --Palpatine81 23:46, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm attempting to make a similar template on a sci-fi wiki, but can't seem to get the CSS to install properly.

Template Exporting?

If anyone has any experience in this, contacting me at z@demon-sushi.com would be great...I am using mediawiki as well, and have installed the CSS functions, so I'm really not sure what's up with that. It's a huge jumbled mess.Gogoicarus 04:49, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Water

Where can I put the link to a mass of water (for example an ocean) of a planet, in water or in points of interest? I do not know how to fill water camp, in some planets I have seen the percentage (%) of water of the planet but in others I have seen there links to points of interest that are rivers, lakes, seas or oceans. I want to know if this second option is correct, because sometimes there are a lot of points of interest in a planet, and a way of having less or classifing them is to put points of interest related to water in the previous blank, the water camp, but perhaps thats is not orthodox. --Palpatine81 21:55, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

  • I believe either percentages or bodies of water are acceptable in the |water= field. —Xwing328(Talk) 02:38, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Famous Natives

I think that this info box should include a famous native section like in that section for Tatooine it would have Luke Skywalker Anakin Skywalker etc. GTQ 02:29, April 6, 2011 (UTC)

New cat

This template need to be recategorized into Astrographical infobox templates. Stake black msg 19:03, January 10, 2013 (UTC)

Also, the fields "highest elevation", "lowest elevation", "deepest point" and "land area" should be included, per this. Stake black msg 13:52, December 4, 2013 (UTC)

Demonym

Someone needs to correct the spelling of "demonym" within the infobox, as it is currently misspelled as "denonym." Endymion105 (talk) 04:09, April 23, 2015 (UTC)

  • It should be fixed now. Trip391 (talk) 04:15, April 23, 2015 (UTC)

Destruction

With many superweapons and planets destroyed would it be useful to have "Date of destruction" field? --Goodmind (talk) 18:20, December 25, 2019 (UTC)

  • I also think that it would be a great idea to have a |destroyed= field with so many destroyed astronomical objects. This field could also be added to the other astrographical infobox templates.—DKS MaXoO (talk) 21:45, 22 April 2025 (UTC)
    • The problem with that idea, however, is that such a field is kind of a poor fit for any of the field groups we currently have - it's kind of neither astrographical nor physical or societal info. Imperators II(Talk) 12:24, 28 April 2025 (UTC)