Template talk:Infobox galaxy

message: I've noticed that several galaxy articles using this template (Aquarius Dwarf, Black Eye Galaxy, Centaurus A Galaxy, etc.) will repeat the image caption text, and insert it in the first line of the article.  I can't see any reason for this, can anyone fix it, or explain it? Brendanfox 09:56, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed. --JamesHoadley 19:55, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Cheers, Brendanfox 23:01, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Image Caption issues

message: If a value for radius_ly is omitted, the template shows  as the value.  Can someone fix this please? WilliamKF 01:25, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Blank radius in lys shows bad

message: In Talk:Andromeda_Galaxy#Apparent_magnitude the suggestion has been made "In general, it is much easier to find B magnitudes than it is to find V magnitudes, so B magnitudes are generally used in the infoboxes. However, the infoboxes are set up with "(V)" hardwired into them. It might be better just to set up the infoboxes so that the wave band may be specified in the inserted text rather than in the template". Any other views? I shall also post on Talk:Apparent magnitude. Thincat 10:14, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This could allow for displaying B and V magnitudes (in two lines) in the infobox.  For example, an entry could be written as "5.5 (B) [line break] 6.5 (V)". Dr. Submillimeter 10:32, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

text: That seems to be true; the B magnitude is readily available in scholarly journals whereas the V magnitude often is not. Can we add a separate row entry for appmag_b? Praemonitus (talk) 01:03, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  As no objection was raised, I added a row for a 'appmag_b' parameter. Hopefully this meets with general approval. Praemonitus (talk) 21:36, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Apparent magnitude 

message: "Number of stars 200 to 400 billion" - what billion, short (10e9) or long (10e12)?
IMHO "billion" word should not be used because of its two different meanings.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.253.21.136 (talk) 17:00, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Billion usage 

message: I'd like to suggest adding a row to the infobox for the galaxy's group or cluster membership. For example, the Andromeda Galaxy would list Local Group.—RJH (talk) 18:32, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I was "bold" and added a row for the group/cluster membership. I also added a pronunciation row for consistency with the Infobox Planet.—RJH (talk) 17:28, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Membership 

message: Can we add the number of stars of the galaxy in the template ? Polylepsis (talk) 15:01, 12 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it would be easier to get the estimated mass of the galaxy in terms of the solar mass.—RJH (talk) 17:09, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Stars

message: Four parameters in the Galaxybox template set that appear to be missing from the Infobox Galaxy template are for the Helio Radial velocity (h_radial_v and
hrv_err) and the Galactocentric Velocity (gal_v and gv_err). Do we want to add those to the Infobox Galaxy template? This would allow the Galaxybox template set to be replaced by the single Infobox Galaxy template.—RJH (talk) 16:53, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Well... the advantage to the galaxybox set is that it allows a custom section to be inserted. WPSHIPS seems to do that with their template set on articles sometimes. But I see no reason not to insert it into the template in any case. The unified-template requires more template-coding skills than the template-set for maintenance issues. (atleast it doesn't look like the complex/hyperlong  ... editing that thing is hard; nor other hypercomplex templates, or hypercomplex template sets (like some of the measurement unit templates) ) 70.29.210.242 (talk) 08:56, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Galaxybox templates 

message: The Infobox Galaxy in Leo A contains a citation, and the citation in turn is causing an error message: Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named ned; see Help:Cite error. User:Jc3s5h
: Okay it is fixed now. Sorry for the problem.—RJH (talk) 19:42, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Citations

message: This, like about a billion other Wikipedia Astronomy pages, incorrectly uses the term "epoch" when referring to celestial coordinates.  It is incorrect to use "epoch" when referring to a coordinate system.  The correct term is "equinox".  For J2000 equatorial coordinate system, J2000 is the equinox not the epoch.  Epoch refers to the timing of an astronomical observation or of a prediction.  The difference is not insignificant for anything that varies with time, is in a short period orbit, or has proper motion.  That may not include galaxies in particular, but we should at least be consistent among objects to avoid the type of confusion everyone seems to be suffering from.SETIGuy (talk) 03:11, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: That may as be, but Epoch is the term used on the SIMBAD query pages for the IRCS coordinates. Apparently, Wikipedia is just basing the usage on the sources. If there is a problem, then you'll need to correct it there first. Praemonitus (talk) 16:22, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect Astronomical Terminology 

message: I suggest changing the infobox's link "Group or cluster" to "Group or cluster" to avoid the red link.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:18, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: . Looks like the change has been made.  Thanks.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 10:32, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Link to [[Galaxy groups and clusters]]

message: I suggest the inclusion of this row into the template, which is an important parameter for observational astronomy, as it directly relates to how easy (or difficult) the visual observation of an extended object (non point-like) can be.
As it is shown in Surface Brightness, it can be calculated via the formula  S = m + 2.5 \cdot \log_{10} A  
(and the entries for most galaxies already display their respective dimensions) or outsourced from trustworthy, established references, such as Roger Clark's "Astronomy of the Deep Sky" (ISBN:0521361559) (Maringaense 12:50, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: , I added  to Template:Infobox galaxy/sandbox. There'll be a large update soon, so comments on the sandbox version are welcome.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  20:03, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Surface Brightness

message: Please explain what these parameters are and what physical quantity should be in those. It's completely obscure and nearly impossible to use. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 16:09, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  The documentation for this template is ''terrible'' 

message: Might this be adjusted somehow incorporate multiple images of the galaxy at different wavelengths?  I'm imagining a banner image that's either the most arguably aesthetic image, and at the bottom the format may have six spacers for an image of each: Radio, Infrared, Visible, UV, X-Ray, and Gamma Rays.  (maybe more?)
This could help make this information more immediately accessible, and also highlight what galaxies haven't yet been imaged at which wavelengths. --Bossi (talk • gallery • contrib) 15:37, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images in different wavelengths 

message: Contradicting the documentation, this template does not actually insert the page name if you leave the  field empty. Praemonitus (talk) 20:17, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name field 

message: The use of the word "size" makes it unclear if it is referring to radius, diameter, or something else entirely. It can be possible to infer the definition used from an actual galaxy page, but it should still be made 100% clear in the infobox. VY Canis Majoris (talk) 07:23, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.—The Space Enthusiast (talk) 23:45, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Size" is ambiguous