1

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3

Hey there, thought I might ask something since you might know better than me. This paper from 2020 mentions TOI-260.01, a (then) candidate exoplanet orbiting TOI-260. From what I can see, it was never specified that it was a confirmed exoplanet, just a candidate. I also see that it was discovered this year, as listed in list of exoplanets discovered in 2024, under the name BD-10 47 b (second row in list), therefore being listed in both the 2020 and 2024 discovery lists. Seems to me that it was not definitely confirmed as an exoplanet until 2024. Would it be reasonable to remove the entry from 2020? What do you think? Procyon117 (talk) 15:16, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is probably better to remove its 2020 entry. These lists only include confirmed planets, since TOI-260 b was only confirmed in 2024, then it belong to the 2024 list. 21 Andromedae (talk) 15:25, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah that's what I thought. I'll remove it now, and also any others that I find that were just merely candidates at the time. Procyon117 (talk) 16:14, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, since you're one of the few people who've edited the V1400 Cen/J1407b article besides me, I'd like to ask what you think about nominating the J1407b article for WP:Did you know? Do you think are some technical bits in the article that need clearing up, like what you did earlier? Nrco0e (talk • contribs) 16:58, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That would be a great idea. I believe that cleaning up the technical information is important, as the article is likely to be seen by non-experts in astronomy. 21 Andromedae (talk) 17:03, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. In the future, please use the preview button before you save your edits; this helps you find any cite errors you have made. Below the edit box is a Show preview button. Pressing this will show you what the page will look like without actually saving it. The overwhelming majority of the astrology articles you are updating use list-defined references. See the help page for how to remedy all the cite errors you are creating. Unused references must be removed or commented out, or stripped of their <ref>...</ref> tags and moved to another section, such as "Further reading".

It is strongly recommended that you use this before saving. Thanks. Isaidnoway (talk) 06:26, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Sorry for the reference errors, sometimes i remove the references, but i still forgot many times. The preview button doesn't show any reference errors in mobile. I will start following Category:pages with incorrect ref formatting instead. 21 Andromedae (talk) 09:33, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, so the preview button doesn't show any reference errors in mobile. I'm presuming that you are able to check your work for cite errors after you publish your changes in mobile. Isaidnoway (talk) 06:38, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

You made several edits to the 36 Ophiuchi article recently, and the last one had two NSTED1 parameters in the starbox. I think this is an error, and one of them should be NSTED2. However, my knowledge of astronomy is a little short in this area, and I'm not sure which one to change. (I was fascinated by astronomy at one time, but I don't think that NSTED1 was invented then.) At any rate, the article is now listed on Category:Articles using duplicate arguments in template calls but it seems that none of the editors who make corrections to articles listed on this page know how to correct it. Can you fix it? Thanks.

Ira Leviton (talk) 15:53, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted the edit that caused this issue. 21 Andromedae (talk) 15:55, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, 21.Andromedae. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:HD 61859, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 04:07, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:45, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Happy holidays.

I was a little confused by your revert at Betelgeuse. Is there a preexisting consensus that for stars, maps are considered more "informative" than photographs for lead images? Thanks, Cremastra ‹ u — c › 21:45, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Try to discuss the change in the talk page. The edit summary was incomplete, but i find the map better as it shows the location of Betelgeuse on its prominent constellation which is important. The image i reverted is now in the article's body. 21 Andromedae (talk) 21:50, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]