Talk:Sombrero Galaxy

message: http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/newsdesk/archive/releases/2003/28/image/a makes the odd claim that "this magnificent galaxy has a diameter that is nearly one-fifth the diameter of the full moon".  Apparently the galaxy is local to the solar system and composed of very tiny stars.  Is there ongoing research about the implications of this?  What is the Sombrero Galaxy's orbit?  --η[ υωρ] 22:51, 25 Sep 2004 (UTClol
:I think you misinterpreted that sentence; they probalby mean that the angular diameter of the galaxy is one fifth of the full moon's angular diameter. ✏ Sverdrup 00:41, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Hubble aberrations

message: I took out the part that said "just faint enough to be invisible to the naked eye but" as it was misleading. At mag 8 (8.3 according to some sources) M104 is 13 times fainter than the faintest stars visible with the naked eye from reasonably dark skies (limiting magnitude 5.5) --Kalsermar 19:42, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Visibility 

message: Since I spent a year of professional research on this galaxy, I want to make a few changes to this entry.  My changes on 21 June 2006 include updating all of the information in the fact box (using information from NED), updating the distance measurement discussion, and adding a note on the supermassive black hole.  (Someone should create a bot to download all the information from NED or the Third Reference Catalogue into Wikipedia.)
Partly because this galaxy has a large bulge, it's been a popular target for distance measurements in astronomy.  The Ajhar et al. and Ford et al. references in the article represent the best measurements available.  (One key criticism that I received from the referee for my Astrophysical Journal paper was that I didn't use these people's measurements.)  Most of the other distance measurements in the literature appear to rely on redshift.  Since M104 is close to the Virgo cluster, the cluster causes M104 to deviate from Hubble's law, so distance measurements based on redshift do not work well.  Therefore, I decided to delete the old text with the broad distance range.
From a professional standpoint, the giant black hole in the center is really amazing.  Even professional astronomers are awed by a 109 Mʘ black hole.  Since this has been a popular target for X-ray and radio black hole observations over the years, I will be adding more discussion in the future.
I also plan on finding references for some of the other scientific statements about this galaxy.  The comments on the globular clusters, the halo, and the early redshift measurement are all unreferenced.  If I don't find anything, I may delete the comments in the future. 
GeorgeJBendo 11:11, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Professional changes: general info, distance, supermassive black hole 

message: http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/image/0803/M104b_peris2048.jpg 
Visually more stunning with lots of extra M104 galaxy details visible and lots of extra stars and so on... Way better overall quality. Part of the problem is that current image is a "featured picture". And I'm not sure about copyright status - new one got "Credit & Copyright:  Vicent Peris (OAUV / PTeam), MAST, STScI, AURA, NASA". NASA is there but I'm not sure if we can still upload picture to wiki with all others credits? TestPilot 12:00, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It is a fantastic image, I hope there are no problems to upload the full resolution version. --Gildos (talk) 23:10, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  New hubble image, way better one 

message: Perhaps I am just blind, but there no units present for this galaxy's redshift on the righthand table. 
Are standard units km/s?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.162.168.186 (talk) 00:51, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redshift Units 

message: Galaxy: Exploring the milky way says the size is 50000LY.
Should I put this in?
Mocha2007 (talk) 18:08, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Galaxy: Exploring the milky way 

message: The History section provides information on its discovery and entry into catalogues, and the lead indicates that it resembles a sombrero, but the article contains no information on who made that connection, and when. Are there any sources which might point the way? Lockesdonkey (talk) 04:13, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who named it the Sombrero Galaxy? 

message: This is the best photo I've seen of M104.  Part of the work was done by NASA but part of it wasn't.  Therefore, I don't know about the copyright status.  It would be good if it could be used. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 18:26, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  new photo 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Sombrero Galaxy. 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/20070117183138/http://www.spacetelescope.org/images/html/opo0328a.html to http://www.spacetelescope.org/images/html/opo0328a.html
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) 19:18, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified