Talk:ʻOumuamua

	This science related article has not received a brainstar for quality. Please consider expanding the article appropriately. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

The theories begin

With this. Anna Livia (talk) 16:07, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

What purpose does this article serve?

It's just a straightforward account of what it is. The only "woo" about it isn't even woo - it's just a couple of sci-fi nerds comparing it to fictional spaceships. Which part of the mission is fulfilled here? Boredatwork (talk) 19:18, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Trying to get ahead of the 'at a weird angle to reality' theorists perhaps? Anna Livia (talk) 19:59, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

I'm not sure "having articles about random stuff just in case someone says something silly about it" is the best way of going about things. Boredatwork (talk) 20:18, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Read the Scientific American article linked to above. Perhaps there could be a general article on such (non-musical) space oddities. Anna Livia (talk) 22:14, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Perhaps, if this was slightlyintersetingthingswiki. Boredatwork (talk) 22:39, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

As 'several' reputable publications have now floated the 'Rendevous with Rama' plot device (possibly from the same official press release) RW can watch the meme as it evolves. Anna Livia (talk) 17:13, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

That is still "write the article before anything missional happens." Conspiracy theorists are normally quick to jump on anomalies, but where are they in this case? Even the ever-rabid beforeitsnews commenters aren't interested. Boredatwork (talk)

Collective cutting them off before they reach the pass and get to the sunny uplands of conspiracy publicity.

What else could be on the 'Space Oddities' page - apart from this? 'The Comet Kohoutek list of known unknown/unexplained space thingies (for which separate RW articles are not necessary)' perhaps? Anna Livia (talk) 20:56, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

Ok I give up. It's your time and your life. Write about whatever random non-mission stuff you like, but don't whine too much when it gets AfD'd. Boredatwork (talk) 16:31, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

The article was created in advance for the woo that object will have wrought on its path, that I've see has been added -the comparisons with Rama were just as placeholder, so feel free to delete them-.

And if someone finds the article's wording improbable feel free to improve it. Panzerfaust (talk) 10:55, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Considering the SETI angle and the UFO nuts who think an unusual shape equals aliens (even in something travelling at approx. 10,000 slower than c), this page is more than relevant. --Scherben (talk) 18:13, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

(reset) Should [1] be added? Anna Livia (talk) 16:52, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

That page has vanished - but there is now a new 'temporary little terrestrial moon.' Should there be a page for 'miscellaneous odd objects in and passing through the Solar System/in the vicinity of Earth'? Anna Livia (talk) 13:15, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

The articles wording and structure

A couple things. First, the Discovery and Trajectory sections wording seems to run-on or scrambled. (I’m not an English major). Two, I found the page interesting yet I as others stated in the other section, it seems to have very little woo-based claims. KnomeFood (talk) 20:16, 11 December 2017 (UTC)