Talk:Q2

apoapsis is wrong

Apoapsis in AU is currently the same as semi-major axis, it should be 1,01670963823418 and not 1. Current data has a citation of an article, that does not mention apoapsis. Michal000 (talk)

@Michal000: Yes, can you help to find the source for it? --Infovarius (talk) 03:09, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

Relation to Solar System (Q544)

How should the relationship between Earth (Q2) and Solar System (Q544) be shown? parent astronomical body (P397) is set to Sun (Q525), so presumably it shouldn't be set also to Solar System (Q544). Maybe part of (P361)? That seems a bit too generic. --Yair rand (talk) 16:54, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

May be part of (P361) is too generic for some abstract notions, but for the planet it is just ideal, I think. --Infovarius (talk) 13:43, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

There are a 3-level chain: Earth < Earth-Moon system < inner Solar System < Solar System
... So, to avoid complex inference we can add information, that Earth is part of (P361) Solar System. Or it is not a "best practice"?
Here, at Wikidata, is valid some redundancy to reinforce some (distant-chain) assertion? --Krauss (talk) 19:50, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

Now description said, that Earth (Q2): "third planet from the Sun in the Solar System". So, there is an astronomical group (Solar System (Q544)) and there are components of this group. Earth is a component of this group. --Fractaler (talk) 14:32, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

In general, I think no, it's typically better not to add redundancy to deal with distant-chain assertions. Not certain about this. --Yair rand (talk) 21:22, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Wikidata has no property to describe the age of the Earth

The age of the Earth is computed in years of constant length, such as the years produced by atomic clocks or ephemeris time. Calendars count actual days, that is, a sunrise/sunset cycle. In the distant past days were much shorter than today. Thus calendar dates are not suitable for describing the age of the Earth. Jc3s5h (talk) 19:51, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Todo list

Some things that need doing:

• Needs more historic data, including start time (P580) and end time (P582) qualifiers to everything in has part(s) (P527) (current and past continents, ocean, and geological components).
• Some significant event (P793) statements of some major events in the planet's history.
• Historical highest point (P610) and lowest point (P1589) statements, if possible.
• Some more population (P1082) wouldn't hurt.
• Is location data possible? coordinate location (P625) uses geographical coordinates by default, but other coordinate systems are possible. Would any celestial coordinate systems have a value that makes sense?
• Chemical composition, but I don't think a property for that exists yet.
• Moment of inertia factor.
• When unit support becomes available (tomorrow, I think):
  • GDP, GDP per capita
  • (list copied from English Wikipedia infobox) Aphelion, Perihelion, Semi-major axis, Orbital period, Average orbital speed, Mean anomaly, Inclination, Longitude of ascending node, Argument of perihelion, Mean radius, Equatorial radius, Polar radius, Circumference, Surface area, Volume, Mass, Mean density, Surface gravity, Escape velocity, Sidereal rotation period, Equatorial rotation velocity, Axial tilt, Albedo, Surface temperature, Surface pressure.
• There are probably some more instance of (P31) values which make sense. Besides for being an inner planet, Earth is habitable and covered in water.
• Some which may or may not make any sense: color (P462), Unicode character (P487), time of discovery or invention (P575), flag (P163), territory claimed by (P1336)...

--Yair rand (talk) 03:25, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

• The has part(s) (P527) section could probably use some reorganizing. Could the continents be grouped under Earth's crust (Q15316)? (I don't know a thing about geology...) Also, should Earth's surface (Q1349417) be here, or maybe also part of Earth's crust (Q15316)?
  • Current constraint violations from other items regarding has part(s) (P527): Earth's magnetic field (Q6500960), Northern Hemisphere (Q39061), land hemisphere (Q786270), four other hemispheres.
• Should Earth be part of (P361) Earth-Moon system (Q18652267) instead of Solar System (Q544)?
• dissolved, abolished or demolished date (P576): "unknown" should probably be removed, in my opinion. Kind of implies that Earth already ceased to exist, and doesn't really add new information.

--Yair rand (talk) 23:15, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Māori name

Whenua means land (or placenta). The Māori name of the Earth is "te Ao".--Hugh77777 (talk) 05:52, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Uncertainties of population

@Mfb:, what do you mean by "underestimation"? If we have a number of 2 755 823 000 people why an error "1000" is underestimation? I believe that this is obvious uncertainty which is ruled out from the number itself (and its signifying digits). --Infovarius (talk) 20:12, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Worldwide population estimates generally have an uncertainty of the order of a few percent. Even in Germany, where every citizen should be registered which should make the official number accurate, the number had to be corrected by 2 percent in 2011 due to miscounting (German source). The last digits of that 2.8 billion number are just nonsense. --mfb (talk) 15:35, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Properties

Земля не состоит из магнитного поля, она им обладает. Вадзім Медзяноўскі (talk) 15:19, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Instance of

Earth and all the other planets, should have the "Instance Of" "Planet" (Q634).  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 02:32, 26 апреля 2019 (talk • contribs) at SrBrahma (UTC).

Direct class is redundant. They are indirect instances already:

SELECT distinct ?planet ?planetLabel ?dist WHERE {
  ?planet wdt:P31/wdt:P279* wd:Q634.
  MINUS {?planet wdt:P31 wd:Q44559.}
  ?planet wdt:P2583 ?dist.
  SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "[AUTO_LANGUAGE],en". }
  }
ORDER BY ?dist

Try it!

P.S. I add some filters because there are too many planets now. --Infovarius (talk) 13:42, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Earth as flat-shapped object

In the property shape, is it said the Earth could be a disk. Is this statement relevant, considering it does not use evidence and that the supporter, the Flat Earth Society, roughly has 500 registered members (2012) ?

Some other people think Earth could be diamond-shapped, for example, or that the antipode people lives on the other side of the Earth. Those theory are as relevant as the disk-shapped Earth, so I think only theory using evidences should be quoted.

Moreover, the page is protected, so I cannot edit it by myself.

Houmgaor (talk) 07:22, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

@Houmgaor: Wikidata is a database of claims, a secondary knowledge base. The incorrect statement is marked with the "deprecated" rank (as shown by the icon on the left), meaning that the statement is known to be an mistake. Such statements are mostly there to be informative about the source of the claim, more than the subject. See Help:Ranking#Deprecated_rank for more information on deprecated statements. --Yair rand (talk) 19:19, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

The earth is not flat G-only1 (talk) 17:48, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

Symbol

{{Editprotected}} ⊕ is incorrect symbol. Correct symbol is 🜨. 217.117.125.72 15:44, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

 Done Hazard-SJ (talk) 21:32, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Creator

This should also mention religions other than Christianity, for a neutral point of view—Judaism, Hinduism, Islam, etc. DemonDays64 (talk) 18:54, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

jorden

Hjart, jorden is written like that in Swedish. Source. Förbätterlig (talk) 19:02, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Ok, but not in danish. På dansk er det et navneord. --Hjart (talk) 19:04, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Gravity Update

It says that gravity has a definite number of... whatever the heck it says, but i wanted to shed light that gravity varies on position of the species on earth, for example, Newtons second law of motion is F = ma, but the acceleration of said species is going to be lsightly different due to elevation, think of a rubber band around a ball, then a rubber band around a bigger ball, it takes longer to cover the exact distance of the bigger rubber band than the smaller, so if i stood closer to the center of the earth, id way less because the accelleration of my small minute body circling the center of the earth as it spins is going to be closer to the center, making me move faster, but if i stood on a mountain id be moving a lot slower, where the gravity is less dependant on the spinning of the earth, and more dependant on the earths mass itself, making me weigh less. I wonder if anyone could put this theory to words under the gravity section since im noo good with this, or words in fact..., including the fact that the base gravity of earth ((or the most common)) is actually 9.80665 m/s2. Thanks and much love, -Feena Aqua (feena) (talk) 18:47, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

World Population

This link https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/world-population-by-year/ will be useful as a reference. Dr.Snip3rFR (talk) 15:08, 20 June 2022 (UTC)