Talk:Timeline of telescope technology

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 This article is part of the History of Science WikiProject, an attempt to improve and organize the history of science content on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. You can also help with the History of Science Collaboration of the Month.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

[edit] Merger

The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
  • With no additional comments expressed in nearly six months, I'm closing the merge proposal as no consensus. -- MarcoTolo 01:31, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Merge. It looks like Timeline of telescope technology duplicates Timeline of telescopes, observatories, and observing technology. The former does seem to have some very useful expanded information. I propose merging Timeline of telescope technology into Timeline of telescopes, observatories, and observing technology. Fountains of Bryn Mawr 17:00, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Oppose - in my view the two articles are not duplicates, especially as the Timeline of t, o ,and o t has very little on telescopes, but a great deal on observatories. I would propose renaming it to Timeline of observatories. It should also be noted that telescopes are not simply astronomical telescopes, but also includes terrestrial telescopes. There should perhaps be a third timeline of astronomical technology to include levels, sextants, octants, transits, astrolabes, the Alphonsine tables etc. There are many ways to slice and dice the information, and I feel a lot would be lost by trying to put it all into a single article - following that course means we would eventually end up with one gargantuan article as a "timeline of technology" - to my mind, teasing out and looking at individual threads in individual articles is instructive. WLD 22:44, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Merge. Definatley SHOULD be merged both very relevent to each other Bryn has got it right!!!--124.168.200.224 06:46, 12 February 2007 (UTC)--124.168.200.224 06:46, 12 February 2007 (UTC)JJ

I don't see how the fact that two articles are relevant to each other supports the argument that they be merged. The article on yeast is relevant to the articles on both wine and bread: that does not mean it should be merged with them. WLDtalk|edits 09:54, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.