lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Lambda Caeli

message: Can anyone provide a source for the designation Lambda?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Imzogelmo (talk • contribs) 22:37, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: A query of the VizierR IV/27 form of the HD-DM-GC-HR-HIP-Bayer-Flamsteed Cross Index by Kostjuk (2002) lists HD 30202 as lam Cae, or Lambda Caeli. It is something of a mystery why the name isn't listed on the SIMBAD entry.—RJH (talk) 16:56, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: SIMBAD stops at Zeta Caeli, everything after comes up as an error. 70.29.208.247 (talk) 05:53, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Probably would make sense to rename the article to something like HD 30202.—RJH (talk) 22:59, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Since the constellation was coined by Lacielle, we'll have to look at Bode. Same thing with rho1, rho2, and sigma Ara - Bayer only designated down to kappa. Benkenobi18 (talk) 20:01, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  Fixed. Simbad lists it as Lambda - but you have to know that it's an optical double ;) Benkenobi18 (talk) 20:37, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

text:  λ is marked in Bode's Uranographia, along with a bunch of other Greek letters no longer in use.  Lithopsian (talk) 14:56, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source for the name?
Talk:List of Canadian first-class cricketers

message: What happened to Tom Dale ? Tintin 08:31, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Missed him, he didn't show up under Canadians on Cricket Archive! Andrew nixon 09:15, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dale 

message: Unless anyone objects, and given that no-one who's serious edited the page is currently editing Wikipedia that seems unlikely, I plan on changing the focus of this page to people who played FCC for Canada. There can then be a section at the bottom where notable Canadians who have played FCC can be dealt with. Right now we have people born outside Canada but who played for Canada - who may or may not be Canadians - as well as people born in Canada but who never played for Canada and may or may not be Canadians. Which seems like a mess. Anyone object? Blue Square Thing (talk) 08:24, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rationale for page 

message: Where is Teddy Ogden ? He should be Canadian Cricket hall of fame. 2605:8D80:6C2:4B7A:91BC:8C63:90A6:A7D9 (talk) 14:17, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: he's in the list. Nthep (talk) 14:25, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where is Teddy Ogden ? He should be Canadian Cricket hall of fame.
Talk:Lambda Herculis

message: The page says "traditional name" was Maasym. What language was it?  TREKphiler any time you're ready, Uhura 06:26, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Apparently Arabic, from Miʽṣam.  Lithopsian (talk) 12:39, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sprained
Talk:Lambda Scorpii

message: The article uses Wolfram Alpha as the source of 702 light years.  However, SIMBAD has this data reflecting a distance of 175 parsecs or 570 light years (easily derived from the parallax of 5.71 mas).  Wolfram Alpha doesn't say where it gets it data, but SIMBAD references the Hipparcos catalog.  I have therefore changed the distance to that referenced by SIMBAD because I feel the data from Hipparcos is more accurate than some unknown calculation done by WA.  Astronaut (talk) 16:31, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Distance 

message: The statement saying Shaula means "raised" is doubtful. The following is taken from 
http://constellationsofwords.com/stars/Shaula.html:
Shaula probably is from Al Shaulah, the Sting, where it lies; but, according to the Persian astronomer Al Biruni (973-1048 A.D.), from Mushalah, Raised, referring to the position of the sting ready to strike.
Mindfruit (talk) 13:52, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arabic Name
Talk:Precita Eyes

message: Nominated for did you know hereMY♥INchile 00:48, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Did you know? 
Talk:Lambda Velorum

message: I've only seen Lambda Velorum once, but it really looked yellow to me. The most vivid shade of yellow of any star I've ever seen. Is this worth mentioning in the article? After all, red stars have a real following, so why not highlight an outstanding example of a yellow star? LightSpeed (talk) 00:53, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: That's curious because K-type stars are usually described as orange. Were there any contrasting stars in the view? That can sometimes have an effect on the perceived hue. Regards, RJH (talk) 18:26, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Yellow star example
Talk:List of Abell clusters

message: Aka Abell 3391/95, see: 
* T. H. Reiprich et al.: The Abell 3391/95 galaxy cluster system.  A&A, in press, 3. November 2020, doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202039590
:* Astronomers Discover Longest Filament of Intergalactic Gas Yet, auf: sci-news vom 17. Dezember 2020
--Ernsts (talk) 00:03, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Abell 3391-Abell 3395
Talk:Lodestar

message: Should this wiki article also link to Mike Pence, regarding his apetite for this particular word? 82.21.133.132 (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 18:43, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: No. power~enwiki (π, ν) 18:47, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

text: I think he typically uses the word metaphorically, in reference to a guiding principle or a guiding person to be followed. There is no single "guiding star" in navigation; see list of selected stars for navigation. Perhaps there is a hint of religion in this use of the term, as the Star of Bethlehem might also be considered to be a "lodestar". wbm1058 (talk) 18:23, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

text: See What does lodestar mean? on Quora. wbm1058 (talk) 18:34, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mike Pence 

message: There is no reference to Lodestar in any work of navigation or navigation instruction, or any contemporary usage outside works of fiction or history.
There are several reference works in the public domain with full text available online. For example, a well known standard, Bowditch, can be source checked here. This is a reference that has served professional navigators for at least 200 years. Similar examples are plentiful.
*First 1802 edition at archive.org
*2002 edition at Wikisource
This would be a fair example of Wikipedia creating a self perpetuating myth, to the extent that an anonymous American Congress person felt the veracity sufficient to edit Celestial navigation to include an archaic Lodestar reference as current.
Ssaco (talk) 14:21, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point. I don't have any special knowledge of this topic, but I just repeated what had already been stated in the lead section, which is supposed to summarize the contents of the more detailed sections like this. – wbm1058 (talk) 16:20, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Usage of "Lodestar" in Navigation
Talk:Long-period variable star

message: I think LPV or Long Period Variable might be a (unnecessary) synonym to "a mira". It just sprains the tongue much much better to say "ellpeevee" than "meyeruh". Said: Rursus (☻) 11:48, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: In error I was. Said: Rursus (☻) 19:54, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: ???
Talk:M74 Group

message: The file :File:NGC 628.jpg, used on this page, has been deleted from Wikimedia Commons and re-uploaded at :File:NGC 628.jpg. It should be reviewed to determine if it is compliant with this project's non-free content policy, or else should be deleted and removed from this page. Commons fair use upload bot (talk) 03:04, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fair use candidate from Commons: [[:File:NGC 628.jpg]]
Talk:M81 Group

message: Karachentsev uses some names that are unconventional by astronomy standards.  I have attempted to replace these names with more common catalog names when appropriate.  In some cases, Karachentsev's designations are the only ones attached to the objects, so they should be used.
Notes on looking up specific desginations in the NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Database (NED):
*FM1 may be found in NED using "[FM2000] 1".
*HS 117 may be found in NED using "[HS98] 117".
Dr. Submillimeter 17:54, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Notes on Karachentsev names

message: The types given in the second column don't seem to match any of the systems listed in the article linked to.
172.143.204.196 21:29, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The morphological types used in this article (and most Wikipedia articles) are based on the de Vaucouleurs system.  (If I had a good reference on the de Vaucouleurs system, I would probably expand the section in galaxy morphological type.)  Dr. Submillimeter 22:33, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Type
Talk:Maffei 1

message: If "giant" is well-defined in astronomy, this needs to be backed up or otherwise better defined. Andromeda is certainly immense, is five times closer, and isn't even the closest nondwarf galaxy on record any more. --Polymath69 (talk) 15:26, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "closest giant elliptical"
Talk:Maffei 2

message: The entries under Apparent Size are wrong. This becomes fairly obvious from the photos when comparing the size of the galaxy with it's distance to Maffei 1, which is 1.34°. From this consideration the (major axis) size should be approximately a quarter degree. Looking at the source of the entries, I find a disclaimer pointing out the numbers may be unreliable (indeed!). In the same database, in a different location, I found other values without disclaimers. Unit conversion gives the numbers I'll use to overwrite the old values here.WikiPidi (talk) 10:20, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong angular dimensions 
Talk:Britské listy

message: I Petr 08:44, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd say everything. An overview should be enough, there's no need for list of articles. The internal wars between original editors may be mentioned, ther received some popularity, more than most of the articles. Pavel Vozenilek 03:11, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: 2010 Spring Cleanup
Talk:Penelakut Island

message: I found .com/article/ this-haunted- place?# this article by Terry Glavin this morning, which has lots of stuff on Kuper's history and current social conditions, plus a bunch of native toponyms.  Anyone interested in expanding Gulf Islands articles should definitely have a read.Skookum1 (talk) 17:00, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Source for expansion materials
Talk:Wrongful life

message: This article needs A LOT of work. It's not even strictly correct as it stands.
</blockquote>-Whoever wrote this comment needs to identify themselves and be more specific. --Cutesmartguy 04:58, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Like I said about wrongful abortion, this article needs professional legal opinion on its validity and its specifics
and generalities. --Cutesmartguy 04:58, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Expert needed

message: The aim of the litigation is typically to provide financial compensation for the disabled person and the family.
Litigation isn't just for financial compensation. What citations indicate it's typical? Temporal User (Talk) 08:53, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aim of litigation 
Talk:Marilyn Frye

message: This is one of several pages I have put up for deletion. All of these pages are by the same author (account now deleted), about professors from the same university. While I will assume good faith that it is not the school self-promoting, the fact remains that the only sources for notability on these articles are the professor's own publications and their personal pages on the university's website, which does not meet WP:NOTE. Therefore, I have proposed them for deletion, pending any genuine sources on their notability existing.2601:405:4400:9420:D086:AC36:FF13:3352 (talk) 23:41, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletion
Talk:Carolyn Bertozzi

message: I've just removed :Category:LGBT people from the United States from this article, as so far as I could see, it isn't supported by any of the sources in the article. That's a potentially contentious category, and per WP:BLP, contentious statements about living people must be backed by reliable sources. This person may well be LGBT, but the category should not be re-added without a reliable source. Robofish (talk) 20:43, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Considering that she won a major LGBT award, I think that might qualify as a reliable source.Chrisvanlang (talk) 11:19, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

text: https://axial.acs.org/2020/11/17/lgbtq-stem-day-professor-carolyn-r-bertozzi/ 73.121.6.69 (talk) 00:01, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  She is a lesbian scientist who has won the 2022 Nobel prize in Chemistry. This page can be added to LGBTQ+ categories. https://gaycitynews.com/queer-scientists-earn-nobel-prizes/ 165.237.199.143 (talk) 23:54, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: LGBT?
Talk:Quamrul Hassan

message: Why is his name spelled with Qua?  I'm not strong on Bengali script but it appears to begin with Kā. —Tamfang (talk) 19:22, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: That how his fucking name is pronounced dickhead 103.156.66.81 (talk) 15:46, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: So ক can stand for /kwa/ as well as /ka/?  We dickheads learn something new every day, though sometimes it takes nine fucking years. —Tamfang (talk) 03:57, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  spelling
Talk:Monoceros Ring

message: Article says, “The ring contains 100 million solar masses (2.5% of Milky Way)” - 100m solar is nowhere near 2.5% of the Milky Way’s mass. See Milky Way. Fig (talk) 09:29, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mass 

message: This wording about the corrugations is very poor, on multiple grounds.  
However, it is also unclear what the author intended.  Is this supposed to indicate that the MW's disk at (galactic!) radii beyond the Sun has the property?  Or that our observations suggest the property at increasing radii from the Sun?  Jmacwiki (talk) 23:43, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Radiates outward"??
Talk:MS 0735.6+7421

message: Some explanation of this term might be useful, since it seems central to the description of this object. 216.46.157.202 (talk) 11:36, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Break radius 

message: I honestly thought that IC 1101 had the largest break radius of any galaxy.--The Space Enthusiast (talk) 04:22, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: "Largest break radius
Talk:Jedediah Island Marine Provincial Park

message: If this is as progvincial park article the anecdotal personal stuff is not suitable, and should be on Jedediah Island only; conceivably yes in a "History" section here but only if made more encyclpedia in tone.  Jedediah Island Marine Provincial Park should be about the par, its incorporation facilties etc.Skookum1 (talk) 17:37, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: title/content
Talk:Multiple star

message: Spacepotato. In your updates you have changed all the written "centre of mass" back to "barycentre".
I should point out that "barycentre" usually refers to the the balance point between the two mass, which in the solar system lies inside the larger mass bodies. It is used to refer the solar system objects, and in such terms as "barycentric co-ordinates"  or "barycentric dynamical time" (See The Penguin Dictionary of Astronomy by Jacqueline Mitton etc.)
In Norton's Star Atlas glossary, for example, it refers that this applies to binary stars as well, but the U.N. Naval and HMNO ephemeris refer that this applies only in the Solar System. Both The Binary Stars (Aitken) and Double Stars (Heintz), specify "centre of mass".)
In my experience, I have always used "centre of mass" to describe double stars, binaries and multiple stars to distinguish between the two terms - this applying to stars. It makes sense to do so, because the balance point  unlike every situation (except perhaps Pluto and Charon)  have the balance point inside the bodies.
I think this should be changed. Comment please.
Arianewiki1 (talk) 05:26, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The two terms mean the same thing.  Whether the barycenter is inside or outside one of the bodies in the system, you may use either barycenter or center of mass. Spacepotato (talk) 09:00, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Barycentre" versus "Centre of Mass"
Talk:List of Neptune-crossing minor planets

message: Should 134340 Pluto be included on the list of Neptune crossers?   Wa2ise (talk) 05:27, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Since  Pluto is now considered a minor planet, I'd say yes. However, there are probably many more Neptune-crossers missing from the list (namely all those which, like Pluto, have a number > 90,000 - the list was last updated in 2005). It would be good to add those as well, if you (or someone else) has the time and the data... --Roentgenium111 (talk) 16:54, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Neptune trojan

message: The picture in this article needs a lable Dauto (talk) 07:16, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture 

message: A new discovery today, see the MPC Neptune Trojan page
and the MPEC at http://www.minorplanetcenter.org/mpec/K10/K10P50.html
202.7.182.10 (talk) 11:14, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  L5 object 2008 LC18 

message: *Pending announcement of 2011 HM102? (Solar System Live)
*M.P.E.C. 2012-T05
*2011 HM102 - An L5 Neptune Trojan (vimeo : Neptune rotating frame) -- Kheider (talk) 21:38, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  2011 HM102 

message: If the years of identification are not known with all the objects in the table, it would probably be better to remove the column. Now, when you click to order the table according to the year of identification, 2014 QP441 comes before 2001 QR332, which is a nonsense. --Jan.Kamenicek (talk) 18:45, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I haven't looked into that yet. It may well be around the time of their discovery, with their status as Neptune trojans included in the discovery report to the MPC. --JorisvS (talk) 19:48, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Year of identification 

message: I have updated the table according to the List Of Neptune Trojans by Minor Planet Center, and it seems to me that the three references in the final column are not necessary. I failed to find, which information they refer to – most of the information is sourced by the MPC list, diameters have their own sources, years of identification are unsourced, but the three refs seem to be extra. Therefore I suggest to remove the last column. --Jan.Kamenicek (talk) 11:20, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The column can be removed, but the references must stay and so be placed at the information they're referencing. It would make it clearer what the references are there for. --JorisvS (talk) 13:15, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Most of the information was updated according to new MPC data, so I think they are not referencing anything now. Jan.Kamenicek (talk) 13:38, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: They most definitely are referencing something, except [16], really. [2] and [9] are about the first high-inclination and L5 trojan discovered, respectively. I think it is best converted to a notes column. I've gone ahead and done so. --JorisvS (talk) 13:57, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, good solution, thank you. --Jan.Kamenicek (talk) 14:18, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  References in the table
Talk:NGC 1

message: Someone, I don't know who, came up with the nickname Jörgen for NGC 1. What to think of this? If this is serious, I want to see one or more sources. If it is some sort of joke, then it's... well... a good one. DannyCaes (talk) 17:25, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: @DannyCaes, it's not supported by any of the sources; I've simply removed it. However, please don't tag dubious statements by placing visible comments in the article. Use an inline template like  or . 199.208.172.35 (talk) 20:21, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  April the 13th, 2022 (new nickname for NGC 1?)
Talk:NGC 1023 Group

message: No way this group belongs to the Canum Venaticorum Cloud of the Virgo Supercluster. It is in quite a different direction in the sky. Its members are projected in the constellations of Perseus, Triangulum, and Andromeda. Clearly seen on this Local Groups Map. Reversing to original text of creator.--Bobbylon (talk) 04:55, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

message: Assuming NGC 891 is actually a member then so is [TT2009] 25:
https://arxiv.org/abs/1908.03073
Need to wait for the paper to get through peer review mind.©Geni (talk) 02:27, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Another dwarfs member
Talk:NGC 1097

message: Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that :File:Coiled Galaxy.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on July 29, 2015. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2015-07-29. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. Thanks! — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:25, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:File:Coiled Galaxy.jpg]] to appear as POTD 
Talk:NGC 1232

message: Who calls this the "Eye of God" galaxy? The nickname is only mentioned in the first sentence, and the cite listed for that sentence (NED) makes no mention of the nickname. The first page of DDG search results for "'Eye of God' galaxy" is hits for NGC7293 (the "Eye of God nebula" and a completely different object) and results effectively quoting this page. Who actually calls it the "Eye of God Galaxy"?
Wikipedia should avoid multiplying nicknames for astronomical objects, since they are almost never official or authoritative; many aren't even really Wikipedia:COMMONNAME, and that appears to be the case here. That nickname should be removed from this galaxy, and probably many others.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2401:E180:8880:EF68:8922:DEAB:DC4E:3C81 (talk) 12:50, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: "Eye of God"?
Talk:NGC 1309

message: I understand this is a start-class article. The author no doubt intends to expand it.
May I humbly suggest that the large image you get by clicking on the base image at http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap130116.html be used for the large size? http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/1301/NGC1309_HLA_Pugh_960.jpg
The re-processed image brings out the distant galaxies behind NGC 1309.
The paragraph on Supernova 2002fk seems that it might be a different article. Where is it located on the galaxy image? Having faded away, you probably won't be able to see it even on Martin Pugh's re-processed image, but it would tie the two subjects together. I know that Supernova 2002fk was discovered in NGC-1309, but that information is not mentioned in that section.
Would that I could be of more help; alas! I am a mere astronomy enthusiast.
Hpfeil (talk) 15:22, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  NGC 1309 ==> Supernova 2002fk transition 

message: The article says that this galaxy was discovered on "Sept. 17.719 UT".   What is that in a normal Gregorian calendar date?  Thanks in advance to anybody who knows. Betathetapi454 (talk) 09:47, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  When was this galaxy discovered?
Talk:Bite the Dust

message: Why is this being considered for deletion? That's just stupid. 211.30.104.199 09:12, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Another One Bites the Dust is what I was looking for when I searched for "bite the dust".  I was inspired when Liane Hansen sang "and another one" as a clue for a Will Shortz puzzle on 2007-04-22.r3 13:23, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The more natural redirect is to the Queen song
Talk:NGC 147

message: With NGCs 147 and 185 accepted as companions of M31 (Andromeda Galaxy), we need a wide field photo that captures all three galaxies in the one image, to show their relative sizes and positions. This comment placed in talk for both NGCs 147 and 185.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8003:E422:3C01:FD20:81AE:225A:3F4 (talk) 08:53, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wide field image needed
Talk:NGC 1514

message: There have been a number of recent results that render some of the information on this page obsolete. (Disclaimer: some by me.) Anyone mind if I give it a fair update, including replacing the picture? Published references will be cited, of course. 
Mike  InfraredStars (talk) 01:21, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I gave it an overhaul. Thanks. Praemonitus (talk) 14:06, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  okay to update?