Talk:Mount Sharp

Photo vetting for Curiosity

Over the next 24+ months as Curiosity wakes up, and starts exploring Gale Crater we are bound to see many photos of Aeolis Mons, I would like the community to either use an established vetting process, or establish one through those that are interested in this formation. 27th August 2012 resulted in a NASA press release with at least 4 high quality photos (found here with commentary http://www.smh.com.au/technology/sci-tech/postcards-from-mars-show-rovers-key-science-targets-20120828-24y4k.html). Comments?--Amckern (talk) 08:41, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Should "Mount Sharp" be named "Sharp Mons"?

Seems NASA officially named the "mound" in the center of Gale Crater "Mount Sharp"< ref name="Space-20120329">Staff (29 March 2012). "NASA's New Mars Rover Will Explore Towering 'Mount Sharp'". Space.com. Retrieved 30 March 2012.</ref> - should this have been named "Sharp Mons" instead - to be more consistent with the naming of other mountains on the planet Mars? - in any case - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 18:04, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

That designation has never been official. 69.7.77.20 (talk) 14:56, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment - I agree - current (a/o 07/18/2012) official naming of the Mars mountain is probably best described HERE if interested - Thanks again - and Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 15:29, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

NASA can call it whatever it wishes, but it is up to the IAU to make any name official. Besides that, I imagine that calling it Sharp Mons from the outset would leave a lot of the (scientifically challenged/uninterested) public scratching their heads.--172.190.16.111 (talk) 20:56, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment - I totally agree - nonetheless, thought there might be some convention (IAU or equiv?) for naming Martian mountains - esp since no other ("major"?) mountain on Mars seems to include "Mount" in its name - thanks again in any regards - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 22:15, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Height

Shouldn't the height above datum be given instead of the height above the crater floor? Not that it wouldn't be nice to know both, however.--172.190.16.111 (talk) 20:58, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

I'd use the words altitude from the datum and height from the crater floor. —Tamfang (talk) 21:31, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Correct, official naming of the central Gale mound is Aeolis Mons

The IAU Working Group for Planetary System Nomenclature has decided not to follow previous NASA annoncement. The central Gale mound shall be officially named Aeolis Mons, and Robert Sharp is the name given to a westward neighbour round feature, seemingly a crater. However, the "Mt. Sharp" will probably remain in use for a while in the community -- usage will decide. --Éric Lewin (t), Grenoble (France) 09:13, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the update re the new official names by USGS & IAU- seems "Robert Sharp" is now the official name of a crater (100 mi in diameter?) about 160 mi west of Gale Crater (also 100 mi in diameter?) - in any case - thanks again - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 14:55, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Update: Added a "Redirect" Page - "Aeolis Mons" now redirects to "Mount Sharp (Mars)" - at least for now - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 15:19, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Updates: Created new related (relevant?) articles/pages -> "Robert Sharp (crater)" and "Aeolis Palus" - all welcome to contribute of course - in any case - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 21:14, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for doing this good job ---Éric Lewin (t), Grenoble (France) 17:24, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you - your comment is appreciated - the edit effort was fun - also - Thanks again for your update post about the official naming - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 19:49, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Moved page from Mount Sharp (Mars) to Aeolis Mons using Move Page Form, per Wikipedia:Article titles. Both names are new, one name is official. Mount Sharp (Mars) is a redirect. JimsMaher (talk) 21:35, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

• Actually, I raised a point here that Gale Crater looks like it is at the position of "Pambotis Lacus" on the old canal maps, which should be right between Aeolis and Aethopis. ;) I assume there must be some formal block definition of Aeolis by now that isn't defined in such a capricious way, though. It'd be interesting if someone could explain what it is for the article. Wnt (talk) 20:25, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

The IAU lists Jürgen Blunck Mars and its Satellites, A Detailed Commentary on the Nomenclature, 2nd edition as a reference. The BAA suggests these. Fotaun (talk) 13:55, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Hmmm, that first link you gave above links to two maps that seem relevant (which is all I see of relevance, though I could be missing something). One of these is a map of the quad which shows all the (other) Aeolis features (Aeolis Mensae, Aeolis Planum, Aeolis Dorsa) to the right of Gale Crater, and Terra Cimmeria to the south. The other is a map [1] which shows Gale Crater just to the south of the boundary of Terra Cimmeria... (still looking at your second link) Wnt (talk) 14:42, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Pure OR for discussion only - After doing some alignment (not sure if it's worth uploading because it's not very good and there are copyright issues with the originals) it looks to me like Gale Crater comes out at the end of the Cyclops canal in "Sinus Gomer" or "Gomer Sinus" on [2], a feature which also appears at [3] Based on the features at right is a temptation with the first map to move the equator, which would put Gale Crater closer to Pambotis L. which is marked on it, but Laestrygonum aligns best with the equator in the right place, so best not. (The 1889 Schiaparelli map didn't have a sinus there, but didn't define Pambotis L. either; the canal Eunostos which defines its position, still shown on the 1953 map, seems vanished without trace on the satellite map I'm comparing with) The one thing I'm not getting is Gale Crater in Aeolis. ;) Wnt (talk) 15:27, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Interesting! Do any of these basins align with old albedo marks? Fotaun (talk) 14:35, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm afraid that's off topic here (try the Science Refdesk for questions like this) - but I assume it's been a looong time since such were visible. Wnt (talk) 14:53, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Well, discussing these old albedo maps is a pretty valid area of discussion given the article. Anyway, came across this interview about the naming. Fotaun (talk) 15:02, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Before Anyone Gets Worked Up Over the Name

Best thing to do is just explain the origins and uses of both names and let history decide what the name of the mountain will ultimately be. The rover wasn't sent to Mars for this subjective stuff anyway.Radical Mallard (talk) 23:05, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Mount Sharp now redirects to Aeolis Mons.

FYI - "Mount Sharp" (as well as "Mount Sharp (Mars)" and "Mount Sharp (planet Mars)") now redirects to "Aeolis Mons" - and not to "Mount Sharp (Antarctica)" as before - also, the related corresponding "Talk:Mount Sharp" redirects to "Talk:Aeolis Mons" - for more details of the move/redirect(s), see "Talk:Mount Sharp (Antarctica)#Proposed move" - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 13:48, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Need more detail about the plans to climb the mountain

A current news report says Curiosity is "about to start climbing Mount Sharp."

Will the mission directors attempt to drive the rover all the way to the summit? If so, do they expect to reach the summit, or is there a high probability Curiosity will have to turn back due to impassable terrain? 72.16.98.48 (talk) 05:27, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Requested move 16 July 2015

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. Jenks24 (talk) 14:19, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

---

Aeolis Mons → Mount Sharp – Per WP:COMMONNAME. The official name, when it is mentioned, is almost always mentioned with its more common unofficial name, Mount Sharp (e.g. Curiosity Rover’s Quest for Clues on Mars). This article should also reflect an American English variation since NASA is the lead contributor into research about the site. NASA also primarily refers to the mountain as Mount Sharp. --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 04:01, 24 July 2015 (UTC) Mark Schierbecker (talk) 23:25, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

• oppose "Mount Sharp" should be a disambiguation page, for all mounts, hills, etc Sharp, such as Sharp Mountain, Sharp Mountain Preserve, Georgia, Mount Sharp (Antarctica), Sharp (crater)'s central peak, Sharp Peak, Sharp Peak, Livingston Island. The current location works as WP:NATURALDAB -- 67.70.32.190 (talk) 05:46, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

For it to be a natural dab, people have to actually call it that. All of those receive a pithy amount of views and are only barely likely to be confused by name alone. The one on Mars is more important academically in any case. Mark Schierbecker (talk) 06:06, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

• Support, per Common name and NASA usage. Randy Kryn 10:52, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
• support per nom Red Slash 03:59, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
• Support. If it's good enough for NASA, it should be good enough for us per WP:COMMONNAME. Calidum T|C 23:18, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Mount Sharp sucks

The name Mount Sharp is simply arrogant against non-English speakers. IAU has chosen Latin - a dead language - not to prefer any living language against another. No wonder, that xsome Americans ignore this. A nation of 40% German descendence must have preserved some behaviour of its ancestry. As we say in German: "Am deutschen Wesen soll die Welt genesen". English is not owned by the US and the English version of Wikipedia is not the US-version of Wikipedia. But what can one expect in a country which even has not the metric system like almost the whole rest of the world? If someone is offended by my opinion: very good. --W-j-s (talk) 20:20, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia uses the most common name used where English is spoken. So the concern that other languages might not understand is moot since there are other Wikipedias. Mark Schierbecker (talk) 15:37, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

LOL. So I'll soon find the article about Los Angeles under LA, as LA is the more common name for the city? There are clear rules for the nomenclature of celestical bodies. The nomenclature on Mars is Latin, not English. Informal names should be mentioned but offical names should be the name of a lemma. --W-j-s (talk) 14:23, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

White balance vs. Mars balance?

I'm curious as to why most of our photos are adjusted to "white balance", which is an approximation of what the scene would look like on earth, including blue skies. But Mars has pink skies! So I think we should have more "Mars-light" balanced photos, to give our readers a better idea of what the place would look like if they were on Mars. --Pete Tillman (talk) 05:36, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

I spent a few minutes looking for a Mars-light version of the spectacular Mt. Sharp image we have at Commons: [4]. No joy. --Pete Tillman (talk) 20:52, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

i realise its already an image-heavy article but

what do y'all think? https://jpl.nasa.gov/images/pia24661-curiosity-gif-shows-drifting-clouds-over-mars-mount-sharp Arlo James Barnes 01:04, 13 October 2024 (UTC)