Template talk:Exoplanet
 | This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
.jpg){kind=small}
Missions
editIt seems rather strange to me that almost all of the articles listed under missions are space missions that have not actually been built, and may in fact may never be built, while a number of ground based surveys that have actually been successful are not mentioned. I recognize that "missions" here means space missions, but only COROT and the Kepler Mission have done anything, while the California and Carnegie Planet Search, High Accuracy Radial Velocity Planet Searcher, Anglo-Australian Planet Search, Optical Gravitational Lensing Experiment, SuperWASP, Magellan Planet Search Program, and HATNet Project (and probably a handful of others that I have forgotten) have collectively discovered hundreds of exoplanets. I would ordinarily just add these, but I feel like this cannot be oversight, so I wanted to check here first that there were not any compelling reasons why exoplanet surveys that have articles and have discovered planets are not included. James McBride (talk) 20:11, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
Template
editWhy is there the PSR B1257+12 system chart from Extrasolar Visions on the top of the template. It doesn't appear to be relevant. 44Dume (talk) 17:56, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
Carbon giant
editThe link for "Carbon giant" listed as a class of gas giant goes to the Carbon star article, which is not a gas giant at all. Pfhreak (talk) 17:30, 9 April 2012 (UTC)