This template is within the scope of WikiProject Solar System, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Solar System 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.Solar SystemWikipedia:WikiProject Solar SystemTemplate:WikiProject Solar SystemSolar System articles
This template is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.AstronomyWikipedia:WikiProject AstronomyTemplate:WikiProject AstronomyAstronomy articles
I am opposed to the deletion. It serves a very useful function. It has been in use since 2005. Why is it now, after over 3 years, being considered as unuseful? Thor Dockweiler, astronomer. 01:30, 18 September 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Please remove the newline between the '}}' and the <noinclude>. It's not necessary, recently added, and adds extra whitespace at the bottom of transcluding articles. thank you. also, there is no need to say <includeonly>uncollapsed</includeonly><noinclude>uncollapsed</noinclude>, when you can just say uncollapsed. see the sandbox.
Frietjes (talk) 15:46, 19 January 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Partly done: - I agree with all but your third point/request to reword the title. The #Main_index should definitely be linked to (and the side-by-side wikilinks removed), but the main goal is linking to List of minor planets (not minor planets). Renaming the header on the template would mean a discontinuity between the template name and what appears on the template, potentially causing confusion. Feel free to start a discussion w.r.t. such a move. Primefac (talk) 18:51, 30 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Primefac: Thanks for adding the link. For me, it is even better to drop minor planets from the navigation-bar (that link was already there – I just didn't suggest its removal in order to keep the changes and potential discussions to a minimum). However, the alias "Minor planets navigator" seems too weak for saying "if you click here, you'll see a list of links to all numbered minor planets from 1 to 450,000". I'm more worried about the fact, that the general user does not realize that this link leads to an overview. In comparison, the fact, that the template's name doesn't match the link, is a minor issue, as most templates do not display their name. Maybe you have a better idea for naming the link? If not the keyword "Overview", then what about simply naming it "See list" (or index) of minor planets"? Rfassbind– talk 22:03, 1 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
To be honest, Rfassbind, I'm not entirely sure I approve of this template. This isn't an "overview" or a "navigator" or anything like that. It's simply a glorified succession box which would probably be better served by having List of minor planets#Main index in the See also section (or replaced entirely by said succession box). However, I do agree that should this template not be brought up for deletion, it should be renamed to something more closely resembling what it actually does.
The other option, of course, would be to completely modify the template so that it shows maybe the numerically closest 20 or so minor planets (so that it actually is a navigation tool), but then we get into arbitrary splits and "how much is too much". Primefac (talk) 00:03, 2 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Template-protected request on 28 August 2016[]
This request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
None of these changes take effect unless |number= is specified; otherwise, the template's behavior & display is unchanged.
When I self-fulfill this request (after at least a week (I'll likely be busy most of next week anyway)), baring any dissent (or sooner, if unanimous consent), I'll go through all numbered transclusions of {{Minor planets navigator}} to add the corresponding |number= parameter (some transclusions, as on Asteroid, won't be touched). ~Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf) 18:04, 28 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Andy M. Wang, I'm comfortable doing the post-update task myself (I've done many similar tasks like this). I also have an alternative (but as-yet-unflagged) bot account I could setup & flag if need be. Either way, I'd like to be the one to do this in case I find a reason to tweak {{LoMP}} and/or {{Minor planets navigator}} (I tend to be good at finding inconsistencies). ~Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf) 22:30, 28 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]