Talk:Milky Way: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 16:45, 6 September 2024

The article List of names for the Milky Way was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 27 March 2024 with a consensus to merge the content into Milky Way. If you find that such action has not been taken promptly, please consider assisting in the merger instead of re-nominating the article for deletion. To discuss the merger, please use this talk page.

Do not remove this template after completing the merger. A bot will replace it with {{afd-merged-from}}.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Milky Way article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6: 20 days

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Milky Way has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
June 18, 2006	Good article nominee	Listed
July 14, 2009	Good article reassessment	Delisted
August 9, 2013	Good article nominee	Listed

Current status: Good article

Astronomy: Astronomical objects / Cosmology Top‑importance

	Astronomy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.AstronomyWikipedia:WikiProject AstronomyTemplate:WikiProject AstronomyAstronomy
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Astronomical objects, which collaborates on articles related to astronomical objects.
	This article is supported by Cosmology task force.

Other talk page banners

This article was previously nominated for deletion. The result of the discussion was speedy keep.

There is a request, submitted by Catfurball, for an audio version of this article to be created. For further information, see WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia.

The rationale behind the request is: "Important".

Size

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Milky Way Galaxy size, every recent paper from Gaia research ^[1] and various other academic and science sources. ^[2]^[3] ^[4] In most cases Galaxy is quoted to be between 120 to 200 000 light years across,^[5] ^[6]not what this wiki article postulates 87000 light years. Data for this article dates back to 1990s, so it is very much out of date and no actual link to research but reference to some article, this isn't sufficient to to considered definitive or even accurate data. The fact that wiki has locked this article against editing ensures this data can't be disputed or corrected unless you're an editor on Wikipedia. Another reason why I never give money to Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.26.122.240 (talk) 21:27, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Scholarly article postulates based on Gia observation, disk starts at 95.7% at 31pcs or 100 000 lightyears away from the center of the galaxy giving the Milky Way Galaxy a radius of 200 000Ly~^[7] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.26.122.240 (talk) 03:33, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

Declined - I'm sorry but we will not accept this request.

The Gaia article that you have cited uses disk stars as the limiter. But here is the thing: major astronomical surveys do not use this definition of size. This definition is restricted to Local Group galaxies, largely on Andromeda and the Milky Way, because tracing faint disk stars becomes impossible at distances beyond the Local Group.

Galaxy sizes in surveys like 2MASS, RC3, and SDSS uses either the D₂₅ standard or variations of the half-light radius (see Galaxy#Physical diameters section for context) to measure the diameters of galaxies. This is widely regarded as standard (see this NED/IPAC document) for astronomy and so we should follow this definition. In the case of the Milky Way, the latest paper that uses this definition is Goodwin (1998), which made a figure for the diameter at 26.8 ± 1.1 kiloparsecs (87,400 ± 3,600 light-years) using D₂₅.

See also Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Science/2022 August 2#The size of the Milky Way Galaxy for the in-depth discussion about this topic. SkyFlubbler (talk) 03:16, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

Mass

Stated Mass is entirely incorrect and confusing readers.

Mass is not 1.15 x 10^12, but 2.06 10^11. Any recent article references the Milky Way to be 200 billion suns in mass. This is especially apparent when viewing articles discussing dark matter, where the visible mass is pinned at 60 billion suns, and dark matter occupying the remaining 140 billion solar masses. Dark Matter in the Milky Way having ubiquitously having a mean ratio of 2:1 over ordinary matter; historically 2.3:1, most recently 1.81:1. Now if we can at least agree that either way, your 1.15 x 10^12 figure is way off so that someone can investigate something that reflects reality and not confuse the viewers and readers. I myself was confused when looking at the mass because I was looking at the 1.81:1 dark matter to matter ratio and saw a figure of 60 billion mass. You are causing mass confusion. Fix this.

I am outraged that the mass has not be updated.

Outraged.

https://www.observatoiredeparis.psl.eu/IMG/pdf/pr_op-psl_mass_milky_way_en_v3def.pdf Tted3286 (talk) 00:59, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

redirect List of names for the Milky Way to Milky Way (mythology)

More room, more material can be preserved. Serendi ^podous 23:29, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 15 August 2024

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Futher to the most recent edit, even more is warranted. Please just remove the sentence "Beyond a radius of roughly 40,000 light years (13 kpc) from the center, the number of stars per cubic parsec drops much faster with radius.[113]" from the Contents section. 1) The source doesn't back this up; it's talking about certain stars and doesn't talk about overall density. 2) It doesn't seem to make a claim like this anyway, and 3) it's just plain nonsensical -- "... the number of stars per cubic parsec drops much faster with radius." drops faster than what? 35.139.154.158 (talk) 22:51, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit semi-protected}} template. - FlightTime (open channel) 23:49, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mass is not 1.15 x 10^12, but 2.06 10^11. Any recent article references the Milky Way to be 200 billion suns in mass. This is especially apparent when viewing articles discussing dark matter, where the visible mass is pinned at 60 billion suns, and dark matter occupying the remaining 140 billion solar masses. Dark Matter in the Milky Way having ubiquitously having a mean ratio of 2:1 over ordinary matter; historically 2.3:1, most recently

This also 202.51.89.223 (talk) 02:07, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dividing "mythology" subsection to a "In culture" section at the end

Currently we have "mythology" inside "Etymology", which makes sense for English, but not overall. I think that it would be better if we add a "In culture" section at the end, as it happens with planets, where mythology could be included. I can proceed with this, but I would like to hear more opinions. Theklan (talk) 16:45, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttps://sci.esa.int/web/gaia/

[2] ttps://www.sciencenews.org/article/astronomers-have-found-edge-milky-way-size

[3] ttps://www.astronomy.com/science/supersize-me/

[4] ttps://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/galaxy-may-be-way-bigger-we-thought-180954532/

[5] ttps://www.sci.news/astronomy/science-milky-way-galaxy-may-be-larger-than-thought-02587.html

[6] ttps://www.astronomy.com/science/supersize-me/

[7] ttps://www.aanda.org/articles/aa/abs/2018/04/aa32880-18/aa32880-18.html

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

@@ Line 82: / Line 82: @@
 This also  [[Special:Contributions/202.51.89.223|202.51.89.223]] ([[User talk:202.51.89.223|talk]]) 02:07, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
+== Dividing "mythology" subsection to a "In culture" section at the end ==
+Currently we have "mythology" inside "Etymology", which makes sense for English, but not overall. I think that it would be better if we add a "In culture" section at the end, as it happens with planets, where mythology could be included. I can proceed with this, but I would like to hear more opinions. [[User:Theklan|Theklan]] ([[User talk:Theklan|talk]]) 16:45, 6 September 2024 (UTC)