User talk:1Muskmelon/Archive

Notability of astronomical objects
Hi 1Pumpkin, I was just taking a look at a couple of your recent articles in the WP:NPP queue. I wonder whether you're familiar with our WP:NASTRO guidelines? I'm not an expert on astronomical objects, but I'm not sure that these stars meet the guideline - if you think they do, can you let me know which criterion they meet? Thanks Girth Summit  (blether)  15:26, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Girth Summit, No no i am not familiar with this subject, I just am trying to make NGC article which are missing in English Wikipedia because i like Astronomy subject. 1Pumpkin ( talk ) 18:06, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
 * , fair enough - I do lots of historic buildings, because I'm interested in that subject. Please do take a moment to read through that guideline though, because I am slightly concerned that these bodies you've been writing about might not meet the notability guideline, and people might start nominating them for deletion; it would, I'm sure, be frustrating for you to spend time working on stuff that gets deleted in the end. Let me know if you think your recent ones pass the guidelines, and how they pass them, and if I can confirm your view I'll mark them as reviewed. Cheers Girth Summit  (blether)  18:20, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Girth Summit, True thing is that I dont know it meets notability or not?, I dont have more experience of wikipedia, But you are reviewer and you have more experience then me so what ever you will decide i will happyly accept it, and if you think my recent article should need to be deleted then tell me i will place the deletion tag my self. Thanks 1Pumpkin ( talk ) 18:41, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi again - well, I don't know much about stars - I look at them, I think they're beautiful and fascinating, but I don't know how they're classified. You should read the notability criteria at the guideline I mentioned. Here is a direct link. Your stars need to meet one of these four criteria - they don't need to meet all. Please take a look and let me know what you think - you'll be able to answer that question more easily than I can - if you tell me which one you think they meet, and why, I'll check it. I'm really not looking to delete your work, I appreciate that you want to write articles here (and I thank you for it!); I just want to help make sure you focus your efforts on stuff that meets our notability guidelines. Cheers Girth Summit  (blether)  19:08, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Girth Summit Please visit this link https://theskylive.com/sky/deepsky/ngc1240-object In his link you will get the details about all NGC objects. I am using this site information to make new pages of NGC. I dont know that this link is reliable or not. Thanks 1Muskmelon ( talk ) 06:25, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

OK well, here are the four criteria: I don't know whether the object is visible to the naked eye, but I don't see an HR catalogue identifier so I'm guessing (?) not. It's not listed at Messier or Caldwell as far as I can see, and I believe that the website you are using is a comprehensive database so it doesn't confer notability. I don't see when it was discovered there, but I'm guessing that it wasn't pre-1850, so the only think we're left with is whether it's been the subject of non-trivial published works, which I'm not seeing when I search for it. Essentially, I think what I'm saying to you is that I don't believe that they're notable enough for an article; what you are doing in visiting some comprehensive databases and writing articles about stars you find there is probably what WP:NASTRO was set up to avoid, I'm guessing. You could ask for more guidance at WikiProject Astronomy, the folk there would I'm sure be happy to help you evaluate these, I'm very much a non-expert. Girth Summit  (blether) 11:12, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
 * 1) The object is, or has been, visible to the naked eye. For ordinary stars, this includes any object with an HR catalogue identifier.
 * 2) The object is listed in a catalogue of high historical importance (e.g. Messier catalogue), or a catalogues of high interest to amateur astronomers (e.g. Caldwell catalogue). Being listed in comprehensive databases (e.g. SIMBAD or NED) or surveys (e.g. 2MASS or 2dFGRS) isn't enough for notability.
 * 3) The object has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial published works. This includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, books, television documentaries and articles in peer-reviewed scientific journals. A single paper is not enough to establish notability for most objects. Being mentioned alongside other similar objects, such as in a table of properties of 200 newly discovered supernovae, does not constitute non-trivial coverage; the paper needs to have significant commentary on the object.
 * 4) The object was discovered before 1850, prior to the advent of stellar astrophotography or automated technology. (The first asteroid discovered photographically was 323 Brucia in 1891.)
 * Girth Summit, Hey i have just created one new Article about NGC Object Draft:NGC 788 so please look at my draft and help me if it need improvements. Thanks <b style="color:Black">1</b><b style="color:Green">Muskmelon</b> ( talk ) 12:28, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
 * , you say that it was discovered in 1785 by Hirschel - that would be a claim to notability, but it's not referenced, where's it coming from? By the way, in case you didn't get the ping, I've started a thread over at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Astronomy which might help us out. Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  12:31, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, but i think my draft needs more improvement so i am submiting my draft for review. I hope some one will improve it and accept it too. Thanks <b style="color:Black">1</b><b style="color:Green">Muskmelon</b> ( talk ) 12:38, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
 * The key thing is the unsourced assertion - it won't be accepted if the main claim to notability is unsourced. Where did you get that from? Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  12:41, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I got the information from SIMBAD site http://simbad.u-strasbg.fr/simbad/sim-id?Ident=NGC+++788#lab_bib Thanks <b style="color:Black">1</b><b style="color:Green">Muskmelon</b> ( talk ) 12:44, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
 * and here in wikimedia commons it's written that, it was discovered in 1785 by Hirschel. Thanks <b style="color:Black">1</b><b style="color:Green">Muskmelon</b> ( talk ) 12:48, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
 * , where on that page does it say that it was discovered by Wilhelm Herschel on September 10, 1785? Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  12:49, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
 * We edit conflicted there. Can you give me a link to the commons page that says that? Commons isn't a reliable source, but it might link to a reliable source - I'll take a look if you give me the link to the page. Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  12:50, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Ah, OK, never mind, I can see it here. OK, so commons says that, but I can't see where they're getting that from - it's WP:UGC, just like we are, so it could be wrong. You'll need to figure out where they are getting that from, and provide a source to confirm the assertion. Do that before submitting, it won't be accepted if the main point that notability hinges on is unsourced. Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  12:53, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Ok let me search in google, If i will get the result from google search i will tell you soon.
 * Hey i got it please have a look in mentioned link here. Here its written that it was Discovered (Sep 10, 1785) by William Herschel, Also observed (date?) by John Herschel. Thanks <b style="color:Black">1</b><b style="color:Green">Muskmelon</b> ( talk ) 13:04, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
 * , that's probably good enough, thanks. The site is self-published (see WP:SPS), but it seems to belong to an astronomy professor emeritus from Long Beach City College, so would probably be accepted as a subject matter expert. Cite that source and I'd guess it's good to go. Cheers Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  13:11, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
 * , Thanks for your help, So finally after a huge discussion we get the result. Thanks <b style="color:Black">1</b><b style="color:Green">Muskmelon</b> ( talk ) 13:13, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Well, I hope that we both learned something from it - I know I did! Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  13:14, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes i have learned too, BTW I have added that source as a reference in that draft. So what sould i have to do now should i move that page to article space or you will accept it soon??


 * And by the way Requested articles/Natural sciences kindly visit this page in this page there are the list of NGC Objects article which are missing in English Wikipedia So i am trying to complete few of them so if you dont mind can you help me?? <b style="color:Black">1</b><b style="color:Green">Muskmelon</b> ( talk ) 13:21, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
 * With regard to the draft, you can just move it straight into article space yourself, someone will be along to review it later.
 * With regard to working through that list - thanks for the offer, but stars aren't really up my street. When I'm in the mood to write an article, I go to one of the lists of Category A Listed Buildings in Scotland, and pick one that looks interesting but doesn't have an article. There's plenty there to keep me busy for a few decades yet...
 * It's good of you to work on that list of requested articles - bear in mind though that just because someone has requested it doesn't mean that we should have an article. People often request unsuitable topics because they don't really understand our guidelines around notability. Cheers Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  13:25, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Ok no problem, Thanks I am moving that article from Draft to article space. <b style="color:Black">1</b><b style="color:Green">Muskmelon</b> ( talk ) 13:29, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I have move the article NGC 788 kindly review it soon. Thanks <b style="color:Black">1</b><b style="color:Green">Muskmelon</b> ( talk ) 13:36, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Detailed criticism of NGC 788
A lot better than previous ones, but still some issues:
 * infobox image: credit William Herschel? No, he discovered the galaxy, he didn't take that picture
 * a "spiral" galaxy? Not in the source at the end of the sentence, and your other source claims it is a lenticular galaxy (oh, it should be "spiral", not "Spiral", but that's a minor issue).
 * The information in your first sentence is not referenced in your first source, as far as I can see, and the information in your second sentence is not included in your second source, though it is in the third source
 * " angular size of 1.9 '× 1.4' " ? The source seems to claim "1.60 x 1.4" (assuming that I'm looking at the same thing: you can check with the Astronomy project if you think you are right and I'm wrong)

With such highly technical or scientific articles, it is important to get it exactly right as far as possible. Fram (talk) 13:49, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Fram Please give me some time i will cross check that page and will correct it asap. Thanks <b style="color:Black">1</b><b style="color:Green">Muskmelon</b> ( talk ) 13:54, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
 * No problem! Fram (talk) 13:56, 23 October 2020 (UTC)