Talk:Owl Nebula

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 30 March 2020 and 5 June 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Tzvetd.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 05:58, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Seeing the Owl Nebula's "Eyes"
At my dark sky observing session on March 20-21, 2007 near Fort Indiantown Gap, Pennsylvania, I was able to see the Owl Nebula's "eyes" (using a 12-inch (300 mm) Dobsonian telescope) using a technique called "blinking." By seeing the Owl Nebula without a nebula filter, and then placing a filter between the eyepiece and my eye, the "eyes" of the nebula "flashed" out from witin the disc-like apperance of the nebula. Also, when using low power, you can also see the nearly edge-on spiral galaxy M108. Rwboa22 21:03, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Owl Nebula. 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/20110524095529/http://www.caha.es/the-owl-nebula.html to http://www.caha.es/the-owl-nebula.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) 02:45, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

Massive problems
This article is basically nonsense. The very first sentence describes it as a "starburst ("planetary") nebula"; there is no such thing as that in astronomy. In many other places, the text is absurd, using adjectives that are simply meaningless.

Many of the problems were introduced in a series of edits by User:Adam37 (diff). Based on that series of edits, I don't think that user should edit any astronomy articles. I wonder what on earth made them think that "starburst ("planetary") nebula" was in any way valid terminology.

I was thinking about fixing the many gross inaccuracies in the article, but then when I looked at the article history and found that they had been in the article for two and a half years, I felt it not worth my while. If no regular editors cared or knew enough about astronomy to fix them in all that time, why should anyone else? 86.28.234.5 (talk) 21:48, 25 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Your rudeness is only coupled by your historical and linguistic ignorance.  Many older books and other better tongues use a term that still more correctly describes the entity, if you have a fixation on absurd language then enjoy it, it will die eventually, the absurdity that is.- Adam37  Talk  20:32, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
 * In astronomical literature since at least the mid 1980s, the term "starburst" has been used to refer to enhanced star formation activity, most commonly in starburst galaxies.  Using starburst to refer to the evolution of a single evolved star is a very nonstandard usage. PopePompus (talk) 20:57, 14 October 2023 (UTC)