Talk:Lagoon Nebula

message: I thought the Absolute magnitude requires only calculation from Apparent magnitude and Distance, because those are both known. Or am I missing something? That can't be classified as OR.85.217.36.231 (talk) 03:44, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I had the impression from the Battlestar Galactica episode that Galactica was actually between Earth and M8 and heading this way, rather than approaching Earth from the opposite direction. The dialogue has the line: "It's a long way from here." in reference to M8, implying that they were travelling from a location much closer to it, although the emphasis on the last word may simply have been part of the actor's delivery of the line.
Then again, being such a relatively close object, surely the only place where M8 and its internal constellations appear similar to how they do on Earth is within a hundred or so light years of the solar system, regardless of whether the observer is on the straight line 
running through here and M8? Cyrek 22:07, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Popular Culture 

message: I am uncertain why Le Gentil was listed as the discoverer, as several sources list Hodierna, Flamsteed, and De Cheseaux all seeing the object before Le Gentil.  I corrected it to Hodierna with a citation.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by LoveCowboy2024 (talk • contribs) 13:06, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discoverer 

message: Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that :File:VST images the Lagoon Nebula.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on February 29, 2016. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2016-02-29. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:05, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:File:VST images the Lagoon Nebula.jpg]] to appear as POTD soon 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Lagoon Nebula. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140517124704/http://www.astrodwarf.com/deep-sky/detail/8387 to http://www.astrodwarf.com/deep-sky/detail/8387
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:48, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: All the sources I've found say Messier 8 has a magnitude of 6.0. But hey, it looks so much brighter. The reason of course is that it surrounds the bright open cluster NGC 6530, which itself has a magnitude of 4.6.
Sources also seem to agree that the cluster is really a part of M8. SEDS says, "It is clear from Messier's description that he had found both the nebula and the cluster." Simbad note says, "M8 contains NGC 6523 and NGC 6530". Steve Gottlieb wrote in his NGC notes, "The Lagoon is a prominent naked-eye object in dark sky." Yes, but it wouldn't be prominent without the cluster.
If the nebula alone is mag 6.0, then the combined magnitude for M8 should be maybe 4.4. Of course, to change on Wiki needs a good published source. Maybe someday there will be one. Assambrew (talk) 22:20, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Including the cluster would effectively mean just the magnitude of the cluster since it is about four times brighter than the nebula itself and would contribute just a couple of tenths to the apparent magnitude.  No harm in quoting numbers that have reliable sources, but we can also add some explanation of what the raw numbers mean where that is apparent from the sources but maybe not obvious to most readers.  Lithopsian (talk) 14:09, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, an explanation would certainly be good. But while many sources agree that M8 consists of the combined nebula and cluster, they still do not reflect that in their magnitude values. Hopefully some new reliable source will come along that does so. Assambrew (talk) 23:38, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Magnitude should include cluster?