Talk:Halley's Comet

600 old inscriptions found in India refer to the comet.

Request to discuss addition to the page.

https://www.news18.com/amp/india/600-year-old-inscription-found-in-andhra-temple-refers-to-sighting-of-halleys-comet-9397724.html

600-Year-Old Inscription Found In Andhra Temple Refers To Sighting Of Halley's Comet.

A nearly 600-year-old copper plate inscription, preserved at the Srisailam Mallikarjuna Swamy temple in Andhra Pradesh, has been found to have a reference to Halley's Comet in 1456 CE. Astronomical data confirms that Halley's Comet was visible during the summer of 1456, according to News 18. This marks the first concrete epigraphic reference to Halley's Comet in India.

https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/karnataka/first-indian-epigraphical-reference-to-halleys-comet-found-in-15th-century-copper-plate-inscription-in-mallikarjunaswamy-temple-srisailam/article69716261.ece

https://www.newindianexpress.com/amp/story/states/telangana/2025/Jun/21/vijayanagara-era-inscription-refers-to-sighting-of-halleys-comet Manan Sharma (talk) 03:50, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

Choice of Words/Grammar

In The History section, specifically in the 1835 subsection within it, it says "Several accounts of the 1835 apparition were made by observers who survived until the 1910 return, where increased interest in the comet led to their being interviewed." is "their" grammatically correct in this sentence? since it feels improper to say: "led to their being interviewed". Klingri (talk) 16:13, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

Agreed. Changed their to them. Skeptic2 (talk) 09:12, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Choice of infobox image.

I have thought about this for a while, and I thought that I would bring it up here. Should we change the infobox image from a normal telescope view of 1P/Halley, or should we do a more close up image by Giotto or Vega 1. I consider this because they both have very detailed views of the nucleus, and maybe it would be better to put the current infobox image in the middle of the article somewhere. Thanks for your time. Informing And Uniting (talk) 13:04, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

@Informing And Uniting: I understand your argument. However, I think it's best to have an infobox image that's representative of the subject. Looking at the lede of the article, we are dealing exclusively with what it looks like from Earth, so I think the infobox should illustrate that. It is the way how most people would have "experienced" it. The Giotto image is currently best placed further down.

Alternatively, we could expand the lede to include properties of the comet's nucleus. Renerpho (talk) 20:50, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

We are using images of the nucleus in 67P/C-G, Tempel 1 and 19P/Borrelly. In all of these articles, the lede section either concentrates on the mission that studied the comet upclose (Tempel 1 and 19P), or on the properties of the nucleus (67P). Renerpho (talk) 21:01, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

• I'm a month late, but I think this was an unfortunate change. The purpose of the infobox image, per MOS:LEADIMAGE, is to "give readers visual confirmation that they've arrived at the right page." We should present the comet in a way how readers have most likely seen it through a telescope, in a book, or on the news; not with a lesser-published photograph from a probe. TarkusAB^talk/contrib 01:52, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Moved long discussion to its own subpage

I've moved the former talk page discussion where we've been working on fixing issues with this article to Talk:Halley's Comet/Considering nomination for FAR. The discussion got very long, and pauses between edits meant it got archived recently -- hence why a dedicated subpage seems to be the most reasonable way to continue. Renerpho (talk) 02:29, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Seriously, Renerpho, I don't get that page. It would take you less time to fix the issues you raise than to write them out on that page. Serendi^podous 14:05, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

We obviously have different approaches to stuff like this. I think that's fine. Instead of complaining about that, why don't you find something constructive to do? Like, address one of the issues I raise. When I find the time, I'll return to it and do the same. Renerpho (talk) 14:17, 30 November 2025 (UTC)