Talk:Centaurus A

New image
I would like to suggest that the new ESA-APEX-Chandra image, now in the gallery below, be exchanged with one of the two images at the top. They are both very good optical images, but showing the optical galaxy with the jets and the shocks all, together in one high-resolution image, is really stunning. Wwheaton (talk) 08:53, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Image gallery scales
The three images currently shown in the Gallery are at very different angular scales. The Chandra one is probably the smallest, likely smaller than the Spitzer IR one, and the submillimeter one is very much larger than either of the other two. Someone (probably me, but I am too busy just now) needs to track these down to the image archives and annotate the images to indicate the quantitative scales. It is very confusing/deceptive as it stands. It would be great if the other two images in the article could be similarly annotated, for the same reasons. Astronomers need to be more conscientious about this issue in general.... Wwheaton (talk) 16:23, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

The O'Meara Allegation
Exactly what Stephen O'Meara can or cannot see is very contentious. That last sentence, "Centaurus A has been spotted with the naked eye by Stephen James O'Meara" should be changed to something along the lines of "Centaurus A has been claimed to have been spotted with the naked eye by Stephen James O'Meara". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Old wombat (talk • contribs) 10:32, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

It's original research and should be deleted. Ricky540 (talk) 22:02, 6 April 2011 (UTC) Done Old_Wombat (talk) 12:35, 25 April 2011 (UTC)


 * It's in the same difficulty level to spot as M81, so this should not be controversial. If you are James O'Meara, Brian skiff or someone similar who is used to doing this sort of thing, it's a piece of cake :) .Count Iblis (talk) 17:47, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Absolutely not true!!!! Brian Skiff has NEVER claimed to have observed Cen A, and is in fact of the opinion that it cannot be done. Stephen O'Meara's claims remain highly contentious. And the citation (the AINTNO catalog) is certainly not in any sense "reliable" or "authoritative". Once again, this statement should be altered to an unsubstantiated claim. 121.218.158.20 (talk) 08:50, 18 March 2014 (UTC)


 * In fact, Brian Skiff has pointed out that Cen A, being where it is, is densely surrounded by bright blue stars, which will heavily interfere with any attempt to see it naked eye using averted vision. Unlike M81, out in the middle of nowhere. O'Meara's claim remains very questionable. Very questionable. Of course now, in 2023, we will never know. All relevant observers now are far far too old. 2001:8003:E490:7D01:ADD8:39B6:67E2:76FB (talk) 11:28, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

File:ESO Centaurus A LABOCA.jpg to appear as POTD
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:ESO Centaurus A LABOCA.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on March 17, 2014. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2014-03-17. 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! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:59, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Citation needed
"Spitzer Space Telescope studies have confirmed that Centaurus A is colliding with and devouring a smaller spiral galaxy.[citation needed]" -- last sentence of the introductory section.

So I found this source: http://www.spitzer.caltech.edu/images/1192-ssc2004-09a1-Dusty-Elliptical-Galaxy-Centaurus-A that substantiates the claim, and it seems reliable.

I'll mess up the page if I try to edit it ... please ... could someone insert this link and clear the "citation needed" tag? 72.160.109.63 (talk) 01:58, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Centaurus A. 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/20141003191523/http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap120404.html to http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap120404.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) 03:48, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

"Hamburger Galaxy"
According to https://www.constellation-guide.com/centaurus-a/, Centaurus A has the nickname "Hamburger Galaxy", which is identical to NGC 3628. Should this be included? --Τυχαίος Χρήστης (talk) 19:02, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * No. Virtually everyone else means NGC 3628. -- Elphion (talk) 21:04, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

uhhh, no NGC 3628 is generally referred to as the HotDog Galaxy, not the Hamburger. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8003:e422:3c01:f530:399:1bda:50fe (talk) 08:41, 26 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Google would seem to indicate otherwise. -- Elphion (talk) 17:56, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Paper on its satellite galaxies
https://arxiv.org/abs/1907.02012

Need to wait for it to get through peer review mind.©Geni (talk) 02:46, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
 * It had already passed peer review and was published on 26 August. Ruslik_ Zero 08:42, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 01:30, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Centaurus A halo.jpg

Surface Brightness
Should 'Surface Brightness' be added for distended objects in astronomical objects. It's a useful metric commonly used by visual astronomers to asses the ability to perceive an object and has a greater bearing on the objects visibility to an observer than simple brightness. It can be derived from the size and brightness of the object. More information here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surface_brightness Markustone (talk) 10:51, 15 June 2023 (UTC)