lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:K-type main-sequence star

message: Don't we have anyplace we can merge this article. This article seems to be so litle to write.--Freewayguy Call? Fish 21:44, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It should really be considered a child article of Stellar classification. I think what the article should cover is the spectral characteristics of class K stars. I.e. the prominent absorption lines. It could contrast the spectra of K-type giants versus dwarfs. Also it could discuss the degree of convection and surface activity.—RJH (talk) 18:08, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge this article? 

message: The given mass range is dubious in the light of such examples as the exoplanet host star XO-2, with solar mass but a K0V spectral type. Probably this is due to metallicity effects, but then the mass range should be qualified with the metallicity it is appropriate for. Icalanise (talk) 22:07, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The mass range is still disputed, but until there is a better source, we're stuck with what is there.  Metallicity effects should be discussed briefly in the body of the article (with a reference), and then the lead can have a suitable summary.  Lithopsian (talk) 12:42, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mass range 

message: This page could have a better name, it could be "orange dwarf".--Io Herodotus (talk) 10:16, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Of all the main-sequence star types O,B,A,F,G,K,M only the M-dwarfs seem to be more frequently referred to by their colloquial name "red dwarfs". So I think it should not be renamed per WP:COMMONNAME. Astredita (talk) 23:54, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rename this page 

message: Sigma Draconis is listed here as a spectral type  K0 V   ON its own Wikipedia page the same star is listed as a G9 V and has two references.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:58B:4103:6D60:4BC:9BD7:FDD:2914 (talk) 15:00, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I changed σ Draconis to have K0 in the starbox since this is a standard star on the MK system.  Lithopsian (talk) 15:49, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sigma Draconis 

message: The term orange dwarf has become quite common in Wikipedia.  However, its use in other publications is relatively rare.  The term red dwarf is far more commonly used, even for K-type main sequence star, and particularly for late-K dwarfs.  It is possible to find reliable sources using the term orange dwarf, but far easier to find sources for the use of red dwarf applied to K stars.  I will hunt down some sources and modify the article.  Lithopsian (talk) 12:58, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orange dwarf
Talk:OTS 44

message: The image seems like it's meant to depict AA Tauri, or was it mislabled? TheOtherSiguy (talk) 14:20, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I had the same impression, but that is the image used in the JPL/Spitzer news story linked at the bottom of the article. Regards, RJH (talk) 19:12, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  image 

message: Since Cha 110913-773444 is not a brown dwarf according to its article, OTS 44 should still be the smallest (better:lightest) brown dwarf known, shouldn't it? --Roentgenium111 (talk) 19:57, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Smallest 

message: I've got something of a puzzle regarding this object. In Luhman et al (2005a) and Luhman et al (2005b), it is described as a solitary brown dwarf with a disk. SIMBAD associates this with 2MASS J11100934-7632178 and has a link to Stelzer & Micela (2007), who describe it as a wide binary brown dwarf system. I think the Stelzer & Micela article could be used to usefully expand this article, but I'm not sure if it is the same system. Neither of the Luhman et al papers list the 2MASS number. Perhaps an error was made in SIMBAD associating 2MASS J11100934-7632178 with this object? Regards, RJH (talk) 19:22, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conundrum
Talk:P-type asteroid

message: "Asteroids classified as P-type include 46 Hestia, 65 Cybele, 76 Freia, 87 Sylvia, 153 Hilda and 476 Hedwig." quote
However those asteroids don't have that category. Why?--Io Herodotus (talk) 11:19, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  category
Talk:Douglas R4D-3 N763A

message: I think it is important that a source be provided for this name change as the NRHP documentation mentions the previous nomenclature as well as offering an explanation (which was also removed during the move) for the nomenclature. A source would improve your stance, just looking at the footnote provided in the first paragraph nothing stood out, maybe I missed it? But this change definitely needs to be verifiable.--IvoShandor (talk) 03:52, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Recent move
Talk:P Velorum

message: :Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *Support or *Oppose, then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.
*Comment I would prefer this stay at the Draper designation, per discussions previously at WT:AST/WT:ASTRO about the general non-preferability of latin-letter Bayer desginations. P Velorum does exist (lists both "P" and "p"), though like many latin-lettered Bayer designations, it does not appear in SIMBAD. -- 65.94.171.126 (talk) 04:39, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey
Talk:Palomar 12

message: This seems a bit hard to believe, given that the apparent distance from this cluster to SagDEG is like more than 10 times the major axis of SagDEG :D  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8003:E448:D401:E8BE:3E5F:C4C2:ACB9 (talk) 03:58, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  This cluster associated with Sag DEG? 

message: Gyr is so ambiguous it should be deprecated in favour of Ga as it is not only shorter, it is more concise in a cosmological sense. 101.178.3.173 (talk) 10:11, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  The use of 'Ga' and also 'Gyr'
Talk:Perseus Cluster

message: 10^-170 sounds wrong. shouldn't it be (some reasonable number)*2^-57?  174.234.1.253 (talk) 06:48, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled 

message: Per Ngrams, I am moving the article to Perseus cluster. Paradoctor (talk) 17:22, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Capitalization 
Talk:Richard Rufus of Cornwall

message: * Social life in Britain: from the conquest to the Reformation, George G. Coulton, University Press, 1938.
* Bibliotheca Cornubiensis, 3 volumes, Courtney, William Prideaux; Boase, George Clement, 1874–1882, London, vol. ii. P-Z, p564
were listed but unused. Kindly restore them once they are being used to verify statements in the article. — LlywelynII 14:29, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Sources for future article expansion
Talk:William of Auvergne

message: An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect William XI of Auvergne. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so.  Prosequor (talk) 20:48, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  "William XI of Auvergne" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]
Talk:Documentation generator

message: I read an excellent article disparaging documentation generators not so long ago. However, I can no longer find it. It discussed how they fail to provide a proper high-level view of the code, discourage the writing of real documentation, and are easily surpassed as API documentation by a clear source (which includes the comments and docstrings anyway). Does anyone know the article I'm talking about? This is for personal interest, but such a viewpoint is probably also important for the article. --88.111.240.31 23:29, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Bwgcolman

message: I nearly deleted this as nonsense. Please tell us how Bwgcolman is pronounced and the origin of the name. Somehow I don't think it is from an aboriginal language! -- RHaworth 11:30, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi RHaworth, thanks for the enquiry (and not just blindly deleting the article). As a Townsville local I can absolutely confirm that Palm Islanders identify themselves as the Bwgcolman people, additionally they are  one of the two peoples who are acknowledged as the traditional owners in official speeches (where appropriate).  And I thought the whole idea of articles being Wiki-developed up from stubs was for things like how it is pronounced and its origins being added over time.  WikiTownsvillian 11:43, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

text: My apologies for misinterpreting you and/or offending you with my reply. WikiTownsvillian 12:10, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think the article linked above explains much at all. It says that Palm Islanders have a name they use to refer to themselves, but it doesn't explain where the name comes from or why it's spelled in such a weird way: Bwgcolman. Nor does it really explain the pronunciation, it just gives what I presume is a so-called 'phonetic' spelling. Is it possible to get an IPA rendition of the word, or perhaps a recording of a Palm Islander saying it?  BTW, the link is wrong, here's the correct one.  Dougg (talk) 09:37, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Really?
Talk:Pi Puppis

message: Who made up the name Ahadi?  It is very new, probably 21st century.  I see a handful of very recent books with it, but Kaler doesn't mention it so definitely not in use before the last 10-15 years.  Anyone?  ?.  Lithopsian (talk) 11:30, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another modern name
Talk:4 Ursae Majoris

message: :move Pi2 Ursae Majoris to 4 Ursae Majoris
This is the most common name used for the star.  Similar to why most people say "55 Cancri" over Rho-1 Cancri, etc. — NuclearVacuum 20:17, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with move - a literature search on SIMBAD confirms that the Flamsteed designation is used more often in paper titles, plus the current article title "Pi2 Ursae Majoris" is an incorrect rendering: the 2 should be superscript. 131.111.8.96 (talk) 11:13, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move #1 
Talk:Pisces Dwarf

message: This page lists Pisces_Dwarf's distance as 769 kpc based on a 2005 journal article, but Triangulum_Galaxy, which mentions it, gives its distance as 620 kpc based on a 2001 publication.  The two should be reconciled.  Greg Roelofs (talk) 03:03, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
Talk:Money mule

message: Just in case the article comes up at VFD, please note that it is linked from external sites such as the F-Secure blog.  Interesting topic, BTW... one of those times you think, "If only such creativity could be directed toward the good of humanity..."  --Robertb-dc 23:40, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  External in-link 

message: I hate to be picky, but could this phrase be better:
"Some money mules are recruited by an attractive member of the opposite sex."
I just wonder that they don't have to be of the opposite sex. Phrasing just  as "by someone attractive" or "recruited by seduction" or something like that would be better.
92.236.69.154 (talk) 12:18, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Attractive
Talk:Polar-ring galaxy

message: This article presents a nice little stub, but it needs to be fleshed out.
At the moment, it has a vague introduction, and three rather unexplained diagrams.
I was able, after a moment of looking at the last one, to determine what a polar-ring galaxy is, however, this should be explained outright (e.g. "A polar ring galaxy is a galaxy in which a ring is accreted whose orientation is orthogonal to the nucleus, rather than parallel as in a normal galaxy.")
JD 07:33, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Better explanation needed 

message: This article looks like a fourth grader's power point presentation. What kind of images are those anyway? TheOtherSiguy 17:12, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  What the?? 

message: Instead of a list with a huge number of red links, some speculation, and original research, I suggest replacing it with text that describes a few examples and gives citations.  Would that be acceptable?  Dr. Submillimeter 11:10, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds like a splendid idea. If you think the list is worth saving somewhere, you could perhaps place a copy somewhere for safe keeping (e.g. Talk:Polar-ring galaxy/Galaxy list). -- Sakurambo 桜ん坊 01:39, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletion of the list
Talk:Pollux (star)

message: I hope it works for everyone. 68Kustom (talk) 23:48, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tightened up the article a bit. 

message: Should the information in , which suggests the radial velocity variations attributed to a planetary companion are actually a result of the star's weak magnetic field be included in the article, or should we wait until it is published in a refereed journal? 77.57.43.11 (talk) 19:23, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Planet or magnetic field? 

message: In the "in other cultures" section, it says something about "translated into Latin as Posterior Brachii, meaning the end in the paw.[21]"
I take Latin, and I know that Brachii would mean 'of the arm," so Posterior Brachii would mean 'the end of the arm.'
Mfein10 (talk) 21:45, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Latin Translation Correction 
Talk:PP Carinae

message: :Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *Support or *Oppose, then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.
*Oppose "p Carinae" and "PP Carinae" are the same star, but "P Carinae" is "V399 Carinae". IIRC either at WT:AST or WT:ASTRO it was determined that Latin-letter Bayer designations should be avoided due to the confusion introduced through them with the lower and upper case forms which on Wikipedia cannot be separated (unlike Wiktionary, Wikipedia does not allow separate lower case and upper case initial letters) "P Carinae" should become a set index page, like how many other Latin Letter Bayer designations are. As we have no problem with ambiguity with "PP Carinae", it should remain here at the Variable Star Desgination instead of moving to the Bayer Designation. -- 65.94.171.126 (talk) 05:34, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey
Talk:Principal Galaxies Catalogue

message: The text reports a Standard deviation smaller than 10, but the link refers to minute of arc. Which one is the correct version?--Franco3450 (talk) 09:19, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It's "less than 10 arc-seconds" when marked with an asterisk, per the reference section 4 description for column 2. Thanks for the catch. Praemonitus (talk) 15:34, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Standard deviation
Talk:Psi Velorum

message: According to Space Engine, psi velorum has one inhabited (!!!) ocean planet! So is that true or not or does one not know? --80.108.153.176 (talk) 16:14, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't find any paper announcing a planetary companion. Praemonitus (talk) 22:30, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: planet
Talk:Jordy Hultberg

message: The intro says he played basketball from 1976 to 1980 and then later the article says he played from 1980 to 1983.  Which is correct? Seancp 23:49, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Discrepancy
Talk:Psi5 Aurigae

message: I can't find any mention of the optical companion in the paper cited in the article, although it might just be in supplementary material that's not included in the actual paper I read on arXiv. I did find a star on SIMBAD that seems to be it though, and it's definitely much further away from us than Psi5 itself, considering the combination of K-type giant spectral type and 8.48 apparent magnitude. 203.57.211.237 (talk) 15:14, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Optical companion
Talk:Simplicius of Cilicia

message: WP:ERA states that before date formats are changed, there must be discussion and consensus posted on the article's talk page. Since there is none, I will propose that this violation be rectified unless there are strong objections. Dalek (talk) 12:17, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reversion of date format 

message: "He is, however distinguished from his predecessors, whom he so admires, in making less frequent application of Orphic, Hermetic, Chaldean, and other Theologumena of the East;" I don't know what this means, but if it means what it appears to mean, it is thoroughly racist and ought to be expunged. Furius (talk) 06:42, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The article needs to be edited.  The clause you quote means that Simplicius employs less material from Orphic, Hermetic, Chaldean and some set of other theological traditions from the Near East in his work than previous philosophers like Plotinus, Syrianus, Proclus, and Ammonius.  That does not seem to be at all racist. --Atethnekos (Discussion, Contributions) 07:03, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orientalism
Talk:Cosmic Family

message: Hi , I was wondering if you could please look this over and see if you can find any sources to establish its WP:NOTABILITY or if you think it may not meet criteria? It's been tagged for notability for 8 and a half years, so hopefully we can get it resolved one way or the other. Thanks in advance for any help you can offer, Boleyn (talk) 09:45, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability
Talk:PSR B1829−10

message: A pulsar 20 times bigger than the Sun? 77.49.176.134 (talk) 14:33, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: size

message: I have excised this planetbox because the planet is not real, it is an artefact of Earth's orbit, that was uncorrected for in the initial analysis. Therefore it misleadingly makes it appear that there is a planet associated with this pulsar. 70.55.87.49 (talk) 04:34, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: excised exoplanetbox

message: Why having moved the page for PSR B1829-10 to PSR B1829−10? What makes me understand even less is that the - signs in the article have not been changed to − signs. Odd.
CielProfond (talk) 06:29, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why the move? 
Talk:PSR B1919+21

message: I think it would be worth a line to mention its appearance on the cover of "Unknown Pleasures" by Joy Division. There aren't many pulsars that appear in popular culture.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.26.89.86 (talk) 16:15, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I think so, too. Actually the reference WAS in the article, but was somehow destroyed by ill citation formatting (not that I know how to do better), as it seems. I restored the original reference. -- marilyn.hanson (talk) 19:51, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cultural reference 

message: I think that around the 40th anniversary of the discovery a dramaization of it was made and broadcast. I particularly remember one scene where the actors playing Bell and Hewish enter a room with printers labelled LGM 1 though LGM 4 are busy printing out detected pulses.
This might be worth adding to the article.
Can anyone remember the title and who broadcast it?Graham1973 (talk) 06:57, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dramatization 

message: Was frequencies were being observed when it was detected ?  Interplanetary Scintillation Array only mentions 81.5 MHz. - Rod57 (talk) 22:52, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  What frequency was it detected at
Talk:PSR J0537−6910

message: The second paragraph seems irrelevant. Explication should be added or the paragraph deleted. -Craig Pemberton 22:04, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems to say that this pulsar is the first star to have its starquakes predicted, and it was done by John Middleditch and team at LANL. 76.66.193.119 (talk) 08:00, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  So?
Talk:Q0906+6930

message: Per a discussion at Talk:Supermassive black hole, I've tracked down the Astrophysics Journal paper and tweaked the numbers in this article to be more accurate than those given in the space.com article. Mass was estimated to be 10^{10.2} solar masses, which is about 16 billion. As Milky Way gives a galactic mass of about 580 billion solar masses, backed up by many citations, I corrected the "about the mass of the galaxy" line to something closer to reality (space.com was flat-out wrong about it). Calculating volume of the black hole by comparing Schwarzschild radius to the semimajor radius of Neptune's orbit does give a volume ratio very close to 1000, so I left that intact, but it's very, very sensitive to radius. I did not include uncertainties in any of the corrected numbers, because there isn't an external source cited, but tracing the calculations in the paper gives about a 20% uncertainty in mass, which results in a 20% uncertainty in radius, and a volume ratio anywhere from 600 to 2100 at one radius standard deviation. --Christopher Thomas 16:42, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fixed numbers
Talk:Teresa

message: There seems to be a misunderstanding of the phenomenon diminutives of names in languages other than English. Many diminutives, for instance in Polish listed in this article as "variants" of names. In fact in Polish, and other Slavic languages, as well as in Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, Greek, etc, there is a sharp distinction between a "given" name, as it is spelled in the birth certificate, and later in all the pesonal documents, and all the diminutives (hypokoristics), nicknames, etc. The dimiunutives are never registered in any official register and never used as part of the official full name. They are just made for use in the family and among close friends, and their use decreases sharply with the adulthood. One exception is the use of diminutives as stage names for pop artists, but this is a very new phenomomenon, and mostly in the teenager subculture. There are some first names derived from diminutives in foreign languages, like Aneta in Polish, from French Anette (a diminutive of Anne), but never of native names. 
Concerning the name Teresa, there is only one variant in Polish: Teresa, all other quoted forms are diminutives. --Jidu Boite (talk) 06:46, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Diminutives 

message: A quick Wikipedia search lists 11 results with people named Therasa (with a middle A and not E). Should this be considered an alternative spelling of Theresa? Linhart.stephen (talk) 12:06, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alternative spelling "Therasa"
Talk:Radiation zone

message: The value 171000 years (looks percisely) mentioned in this article is very different from 50000000 in , 20000000 in my book, >1000000 in . But in  it is only 10000. The uncertainty is very large (about four orders).  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.49.12.197 (talk) 06:46, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  the time-constant