Talk:Messier 58

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Messier 58. 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/20101011073455/http://solarius.net/assets/finder_charts/messier_58.pdf to http://www.solarius.net/assets/finder_charts/messier_58.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110724193241/http://www.optcorp.com/edu/articleListEDU.aspx?cid=103 to http://www.optcorp.com/edu/articleListEDU.aspx?cid=103
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070817131727/http://gallery.spitzer.caltech.edu/Imagegallery/image.php?image_name=sig06-003 to http://gallery.spitzer.caltech.edu/Imagegallery/image.php?image_name=sig06-003

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) 14:59, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

Deep Sky Videos
Deep Sky Videos would like to unofficially call this galaxy "The Ring Bearer Galaxy" as a play on words with the Ring in the center and the Bar galaxy shape. As I'm unsure how to (or if I should) add this, I'm just putting it here. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NiiWXjPp2KM 216.178.91.62 (talk) 13:33, 7 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Random people on youtube are generally unreliable sources/non-notable. -- Kheider (talk) 14:24, 7 February 2018 (UTC)


 * While I agree that to expect this edit to stay is unrealistic. It is very wrong to say that Deep Sky Videos is an unreliable, and not notable source. Along with Numberphile, Periodic Videos and Sixty Symbols, it is one of a number of important video channels run by Brady Haran who along with Professor Michael Merrifield and Professor Philip Moriarty of the University of Nottingham won the 2016 Kelvin Medal and Prize for their work on Sixty Symbols, and whose Periodic Videos was specifically mentioned in the citation for the award of the Knighthood to Professor Sir Martyn Polliakoff ; so hardly not-notable. You are tarring all YouTube channels with a brush that is undeserved, especially in this case. It is run by the Universities of Nottingham and Sheffield's departments of Astronomy and Dr Smethurst is the Sixty Symbols Ogden Fellow at the University of Nottingham; and part of the requirements of her fellowship is to present physics interest videos for the YouTube channels Sixty Symbols and Deep Sky Videos.  She has also appeared on the BBC explaining science to the public.Everlong Day (talk) 16:19, 7 February 2018 (UTC)


 * It doesn't matter that she is a qualified and respected astrophysicist, she is not (and doubt she would claim she is) in the position to just name astronomical objects. The video comes more under her title as "science communicator" not astrophysicist. KylieTastic (talk) 17:02, 7 February 2018 (UTC)


 * I never said that she was. If you read my criticism properly, it is NOT about the naming, as I said "While I agree that to expect this edit to stay is unrealistic". It was clearly a throwaway remark, not intended to be definitive on the matter. My criticism was exclusively about the trivialisation of the work of Deep Sky Videos. Everlong Day (talk) 17:27, 7 February 2018 (UTC)


 * This section as started by the anon was about the request to add the name, and the response from Kheider was in relation to that. In the respect to that topic Brady and Becky are "Random people" just having a chat. As for being a source for being the "farthest known astronomical object" at the time, its still not a great source, as she was just quoting from memory from a real source. KylieTastic (talk) 17:34, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I've posted a comment asking for a source... we can but hope.... KylieTastic (talk) 17:42, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I disagree. Random people would be people off the street, not an astronomer and a multi-award winning video journalist. You said that they were generally unreliable/not notable, which is patently not true.Everlong Day (talk) 18:37, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

I watched the youtube video in question. At no point did I expect them to think their nickname would be taken seriously. Unless their name for M58 catches on, the nickname itself has zero notability. -- Kheider (talk) 18:09, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I concur.  ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  18:41, 7 February 2018 (UTC)