Talk:Solar eclipse of March 20, 2015

	This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Astronomy: Eclipses Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.AstronomyWikipedia:WikiProject AstronomyTemplate:WikiProject AstronomyAstronomy articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by Eclipses task force.

This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened: March 15 to 21, 2015 (19th)

I added a second animation, closeup, with smaller time steps, a bit too dark, but nicely shows the stretched total eclipse path near the north pole. I could remake it brighter. I could also make an animation of appearance from the north pole, but since the sun is right on the horizon, I'd really need to add atmospheric refraction to make it accurate. Tom Ruen (talk) 15:14, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Interesting! Sounds great; keep up the good work. -- AstroU (talk) 12:14, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A great article, herein. Countdown to the moon covering the sun in a week. -- Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 14:13, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

All the maps showing the total eclipse path still display the DDR (German Democratic Republic) in eastern Germany. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.120.42.249 (talk) 13:06, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Along with MANY other instances of borders that haven't been updated since the 1980s. I'm not even sure why these maps would have national borders, it would seem to me that the continental outlines would be sufficient when dealing with a purely natural phenomenon like this. --Khajidha (talk) 11:28, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed this as inappropriate. WP is not a TV guide and any such list is bound to be highly selective and so promotional. The inline links violated our external links policy, and again were selective and promotional. And the information has no long term relevance; live broadcasts have no relevance after the event. Once it is over there may be television programs that can be used as references but they are unlikely to be the same as the programs and coverage listed.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 23:37, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think the reference to totality reaching 102% in one location needs to be explained as the average reader (raises hand) has no idea how something can be more than 102% total. 68.146.52.234 (talk) 14:03, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

102% is the moon being close to earth, therefore is seen as bigger in relation to the sun, and also covers some of the corona. TheWolf0202 (talk) 12:49, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The map in the box at the top right of the article needs a much better explanation (or link to an explanation somewhere else). For example, what are the pink lines? What are "P1" and "P4"? What is "Sub S"? What is the relevance of the shaded hemisphere? (Obviously it shows night, but night when? The diagram spans several hours.) 109.153.236.190 (talk) 18:11, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I added some text if you click on the image, and also a link to the full graphic from NASA. Tom Ruen (talk) 18:46, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for your reply. It seems that "Sub S" has been truncated and should read "Sub Solar", which I guess might refer to Subsolar point at the time of greatest eclipse? Might it be a good idea to replace the existing image with the one from the NASA site (assuming it is free to use, which I seem to remember NASA materials are)? As well as fixing the truncation, the NASA image is also slightly better overall quality and has slightly clearer labelling (e.g. on the Wikipedia version it looks as if "Total" refers to the star, i.e. the eclipe was total in only one place, which is obviously wrong. 109.153.236.190 (talk) 20:36, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Aren't there any images from the Faroe Islands or Svalbard available? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Darkestofnights (talk • contribs) 14:22, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Would like to see images of the total eclipse here as well. There are images published in a range of Norwegian papers, like here, but I am not aware of any of them being free. Grrahnbahr (talk) 23:50, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

don´t now how because of this protection...

Not done: this is the

Upload your image to Wikimedia Commons and then post it here. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 18:48, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

Sorry, but i have it already uploaded...But I can´t put it into the Article. It´s the"End of totality, Tórshavn, Faroe Islands" Picture

Picture added.

Picture of the totality in Svalbard

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Hi, I uploaded a picture of the totality on Wikimedia. Can anyone tell me how to put it on the main article?

Dam!en (talk) 09:20, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 11:37, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Since this was mostly visible in Europe, shouldn't the date format be day-month-year and not month-day-year? (Note that this is an American asking, I don't expect the date format I grew up with to be the default on every article.) --Khajidha (talk) 11:24, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is no problem (as far as I know) if the month name is written out in words. In the UK we equally use "March 20, 2015" and "20 March 2015". In fact, the front page of The Times gives the date in a format like "March 20 2015". The difference arises when the month is given as a number, e.g. 3/20/2015 in the US vs. 20/3/2015 in the UK. This latter style should always by avoided in all articles as potentially highly confusing to readers. 86.136.150.109 (talk) 14:41, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

...has no informational value whatsoever. One picture looks like the other, and all look like every picture ever taken during an eclipse.91.10.33.182 (talk) 16:10, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It shows where the eclipse was visible, and the cloud conditions. Tom Ruen (talk) 16:26, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The photo of the eclipse as seen in Chester-le-Street says that it was taken at 9:07 UTC. Maximum eclipse at Chester-le-Street was at 9:34:50 UTC. At 9:07 there would have been a lot more of the sun's disc visible, and it would have looked more like the letter "C". At maximum eclipse the crescent of the sun would have looked like the sliver in the photo and would have appeared to have been on its back, making more of a "U" shape (as seen in the photo). Clearly, this picture was taken much closer to maximum eclipse (9:34:50) than 9:07. Unless we can establish what time it was taken and change the caption, it would be better to remove it. 79.76.119.69 (talk) 22:48, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've got some photos (not yet uploaded) of the eclipse from the Shetland Islands, most taken through welding glass and timed from 0847 to 0944...would any of these be useful added to the gallery? Lady BlahDeBlah 21:30, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The paragraph titled "Impact" needs to be rewritten. It currently is mostly predictions made before the event. --Khajidha (talk) 18:13, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"The only populated places reachable by public land travel from which the totality could be seen were the Faroe Islands and Svalbard.[2]" Aside from anyone living in the Faroes or on Svalbard, who wouldn't have to "reach" those locations, I wonder how anyone would get there by land travel. --Khajidha (talk) 13:53, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like the time of greatest eclipse here is given in TT (terrestrial time) rather than UTC. See http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEplot/SEplot2001/SE2015Mar20T.GIF

Gotta be careful, because UTC differs from TD by about 67 seconds these days.

I haven't the faintest clue how to edit the eclipse infobox macro, though, so somebody else is going to have to fix this issue.

• EclipseTórshavn.JPG

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:36, 18 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]