Talk:10th century

	This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's Years on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.YearsWikipedia:WikiProject YearsTemplate:WikiProject YearsYears articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

	Middle Ages Low‑importance
Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

	Lists Low‑importance
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

History Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

"Twentieth century Belgian astronomer Jean Meeus asserts that the orbits of all nine planets were within the same 90% arc of the solar system on 1 February 949. The next time it is thought this will occur is on 6 May 2492."

What is meant by "90% arc". Should this be 90 degree arc? A 90% arc would be most of the solar system and does not seem too rare.--35.8.153.13 19:55, 31 July 2006 (UTC) John French.[reply]

Agreed. I've done an edit, which includes changing the word "orbits" to "positions". If all the planets lined up within 9 (nine) degrees of each other, it would be an interesting sight, so I similarly don't understand what the fuss was about. EatYerGreens 15:28, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An image used in this article, File:Ganesha 1.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do? Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request This notification is provided by a Bot -- talk) 11:19, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply ]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of 10th century's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "end":

• From Norway: pp. 202–203.
• From
  ISBN 981-4155-67-5
  .

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 11:53, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]