Talk:99942 Apophis

Untitled

• Archive of discussions prior to 01.01.2006
• Archive of discussions prior to 01.01.2009

"Proposed" symbol

In Discovery and naming, we mention Denis Moskowitz's proposed symbol. Our sources are his 2008 book, and his website. I have two issues with this section.

1. The use of the image seems problematic for copyright reasons. I have just nominated it for deletion (see here for details). Copyright would probably be no issue if this was just a Unicode symbol, but...
2. Unlike most of the other symbols devised by Moskowitz (see here and here for the two latest examples), I see no evidence that he ever actually proposed this one to Unicode. When we write that Denis Moskowitz, a software engineer who devised most of the dwarf planet symbols in Unicode, proposed a symbol for Apophis, aren't we implying that he proposed them to Unicode, like the dwarf planet and many other asteroid symbols he devised? Until he submits it to Unicode, the proposal was for his book, and his book only, and I think we may be giving it undue weight here. Renerpho (talk) 02:48, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

1. Copyright isn't an issue for simple graphic symbols like this, and in any case the rights have been changed.

2. You could read that into it, so perhaps it should be reworded, but AFAICT Moskowitz hasn't proposed anything to Unicode. — kwami (talk) 06:12, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Proposed Foresight mission

In the section about the #Planetary Society competition, we previously stated that the prize was won by a concept called Foresight by SpaceWorks Enterprises. However, both of our sources (BBC, and the Planetary Society itself) disagree, noting that first place went to the team led by SpaceWorks Engineering, Inc. of Atlanta, Georgia in conjunction with SpaceDev, Inc., Poway, California.[1][2] If this is meant to be the same company then we need an additional reference for that, because the name is different in both sources. Also, why are we leaving out SpaceDev? Renerpho (talk) 14:58, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

If these are the same company, and the Planetary Society press release is simply mistaken, then I suggest that we add a redirect from SpaceWorks Engineering to SpaceWorks Enterprises. However, I want to make sure that we are in fact dealing with the same entity. Renerpho (talk) 15:10, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

IPA pronounciation

I think it would be useful to include IPA pronounciation in the infobox. Since there seems to be two possible pronounciations, both could be included. However, when I went to add them myself I saw there was already a line that seemed to include them:

| pronounced = {{IPAc-en|ə|ˈ|p|ɒ|f|ɪ|s}}, (trad.) {{IPAc-en|ˈ|æ|p|ə|f|ɪ|s}}

For some reason this part does not show up in the article, you can only see it when viewing source. I don't know what is causing this so I can't fix it myself. Can we do something so this line would be visible in the infobox? 4a617374726562 (talk) 10:34, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

Pronounce and pronounced are mutually exclusive, and if both are used (like here), pronounce takes priority. Renerpho (talk) 14:58, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

@4a617374726562: I've removed the other parameter, for now. Renerpho (talk) 15:15, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

@Kwamikagami: Thanks for correcting and adding a source for the IPA pronunciation. Right now, the article reads

The mythological creature Apophis is pronounced with the accent on the first syllable (/ˈæpəfɪs/). In contrast, the asteroid's name is generally accented on the second syllable (/əˈpoʊfɪs/,

which seems fine, except that dictionary.com disagrees. See its definition:

Apophis
/ əˈpoʊ fɪs /
noun
Egyptian Mythology.
a demon serpent of darkness whom Ra, as sun god, destroys every morning at dawn.

We could use that as a citation if we wanted to show that the name of the mythological creature is pronounced that way (rather than that of the asteroid). What we're saying is the exact opposite, which makes this citation very confusing. To quote my own comment from April 2024: The Apep article refers to dictionary.com for the pronunciation, but that source conflates the two meanings, and is of no use. Renerpho (talk) 04:31, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

/a-POH-fis/ is an irregular pronunciation, since the Greek [and presumably Latin] has a short /o/, which wouldn't be stressed. I don't know about a source for the regular pronunciation, though. — kwami (talk) 05:01, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

@Kwamikagami: The classical pronunciations were discussed in 2019, and again in 2024. We based the IPA in the article on what's given on Wiktionary,[3] which is /ˈæpəfɪs/, /əˈpɒfɪs/. I think I'm also hearing ɒ, not oʊ, in the examples given in that discussion (like from David Tholen and Stargate). The vowel in the asteroid's name definitely isn't oʊ, and I'd prefer that to be removed again. As already explained, dictionary.com was dismissed then.

In that discussion, I originally asked for a reference for the classical pronunciation, but was overturned. Apparently no citation is needed for that. Renerpho (talk) 05:23, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Yes, Tholen uses /ɒ/, with disyllabic laxing, which may be an American thing.

Random House 2nd ed. unabbridged has /oʊ/. Various myth'l dicts also have /oʊ/, though perhaps we initial stress [can't tell].

Not in Longman or the full 2nd ed. OED. — kwami (talk) 16:14, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

@Kwamikagami: Note that mythological dictionaries are irrelevant. The question is how astronomers pronounce the name of the asteroid, not how anyone pronounces the name of the mythological being. Renerpho (talk) 17:17, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

They're the same name, though N.D. Tyson also has an /ɒ/.[4] All of our sources are American, though. — kwami (talk) 18:04, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

References

Outdated information

This page needs to be updated to include the same information given about 99942 Apophis (2004 MN4) on the NEO Earth Close Approaches page, using the latest solution date as given on the relevant Small-Body Database Lookup entry.

This includes, but not limited to, (at least) the next couple of Earth close-approach dates, the information given about its nominal distance and nominal distance (min,), current placement on the Torino Scale, and more.

Additionally, any pages connected to this subject also need updating, such as the afore-mentioned Torino Scale page, the List of objects with non-zero Torino ratings page, the Near-Earth object page and many more. Digitalnarwhal (talk) 14:26, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

I have updated the article. But since we already knew the 2029 approach distance with a 3 km resolution, changes to the article are insignificant and cosmetic. -- Kheider (talk) 14:24, 1 March 2025 (UTC)