Content deleted Content added
Mark viking (talk | contribs) Assessment: Spaceflight: class=C; Systems: class=C (assisted) |
m Maintain {{WPBS}}: 3 WikiProject templates. Keep majority rating "Start" in {{WPBS}}. Keep 1 different rating in {{WikiProject Weather}}. (Fix Category:Pages using WikiProject banner shell with invalid parameters) Tag: |
||
| (7 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|1=
{{WikiProject Weather|met-data-task-force=
{{WikiProject Spaceflight
{{WikiProject Systems |field=visualization
}}
{{Broken anchors|links=
* <nowiki>[[Atmosphere of Earth#Structure of the atmosphere|lower atmosphere]]</nowiki> The anchor (#Structure of the atmosphere) is no longer available because it was [[Special:Diff/874094596|deleted by a user]] before. <!-- {"title":"Structure of the atmosphere","appear":{"revid":309347785,"parentid":309347017,"timestamp":"2009-08-22T00:43:37Z","removed_section_titles":["Temperature and layers"],"added_section_titles":["Structure of the atmosphere"]},"disappear":{"revid":874094596,"parentid":874094042,"timestamp":"2018-12-17T02:52:32Z","removed_section_titles":["Structure of the atmosphere","Principal layers"],"added_section_titles":["Stratification"]}} -->
}}
Line 38 ⟶ 41:
== What replaced MODIS? ==
It says in the article it had a design life of 6 years and began in 2002, so I'm guessing they made something to supercede it. --[[User:IdLoveOne|<
: Not yet, the satellites are still operational. I'm not sure if NASA has annonced anything to replace the satellites so far. [[User:Wonderworld1995268|Wonderworld1995268]] ([[User talk:Wonderworld1995268|talk]]) 03:29, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
Line 46 ⟶ 49:
{{ping|Tony1}} If an article were to be created for the relevant type of spectroradiometry, then I would be more swayed by your move rationale. While the current title is now apparently consistent with Wikipedia's style, I'm not certain this is actually intended to be descriptive title; it is the name of the instrument. This is especially pronounced upon examining the information page [http://modis.gsfc.nasa.gov/about/ here]. It reads "Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer" with capital letters starting each word, and curiously, it also neglects the hyphen. Is this worth discussing? [[User:Dustin V. S.|<span style="color:green; font-family:Times New Roman">''Dustin''</span>]] [[User talk:Dustin V. S.|(<span style="color:green; font-family:Times New Roman">talk</span>)]] 17:12, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
:{{ping|Dustin V. S.}} Do you mean the way some scientists/organisations cap every type of spectroscopy? Methinks it's in the mistaken belief that because they're typically expressed with capped initialism, those letters should be capped in the expanded forms (against the advice of the major style guides, and en.WP's). But here, perhaps your point is that this is a specific instrument developed by NASA (which suffers from serious cap-disease—every nut and bolt seems to be capped in their world). If there were more than one of these MODIS's, there'd be no doubt: generic and downcased. If it's the only one, I wonder whether it embraces a measurement phenomenon (moderate-resolution imaging spectroradiometry)? If so, that phenomenon could presumably be the basis of other devices. Sometimes there's a grey area where a commercial product ''becomes'' generic (hoovering the carpet; googling). Generally, the trend is to minimise upcasing (according to CMOS and Oxford), although they're not uber-specific about that. Pleased to hear your opinions. [[User:Tony1|<
{{outdent}}
{{ping|Dustin V. S.|Tony1}} The official name is "Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer" according to NASA: [https://modis.gsfc.nasa.gov/about/]. Furthermore, this article is about a specific sensor instance, not a generic type of sensor. Can we agree to rename the article? [[User:Fgnievinski|fgnievinski]] ([[User talk:Fgnievinski|talk]]) 16:07, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
| |||