Talk:List of largest nebulae

This article was nominated for deletion on 21 July 2021. The result of the discussion was keep.

This page was proposed for deletion by SkyFlubbler (talk · contribs) on 24 January 2021.

Astronomy: Astronomical objects Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Astronomical objects, which collaborates on articles related to astronomical objects.

Lists Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Organization

This current organization makes no sense, all LαB are much much larger than any other type found on this list, so the rankings are completely useless. Many nebulae are much larger than the ones that have a rank number here. Rank numbers don't mean ranking on our listed nebulae, it should be ranking of all known nebuale. I am therefore deleting ranking, as it doesn't make sense. Similarly, the mismatch in size scaling of the different types of nebulae means that the list should be separated by type and size regime (ie. star cluster / galaxy / star ) -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 07:36, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This list just has to go

Seriously. I cannot emphasize enough that this list has to go away. It does not make any sense and there is no hope of fixing it.

There is no extant repository of nebulae that has data on their sizes. Most of the sources about sizes are either based on individual studies with conflicting methods or stemming from third party, unreliable sources.

This list is not a true representative of the largest nebulae because it just selectively picks some notable ones of whatever an editor decides to throw in there. There has to be a large-scale listing with a common reference in size. For all we know there could be some obscure nebulae out there known only by a catalogue number that is of immense size. SkyFlubbler (talk) 01:34, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I might agree. The Space Enthusiast (talk) 04:38, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to create a workpage for this list but I'm no longer too sure at this point. Regards—ZaperaWiki44^{(✉/Contribs)} 17:10, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Massive problem with references; Remove unreferenced data?

I have counted about 10 object here with no reference at all for the size, neither on this page or its own page. I propose we should remove all unreferenced size data on this page. The angular diameter area is even worse, as none of the sizes in that section are actually referenced, neither are the notes, and the list of largest galaxies as well as the list of largest stars, don’t have angular diameters listed. This entire page is just a mess, and the more I write this, the more problems I find on this list. Atlantlc27Lol (talk) 03:23, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I honestly think that the page should be deleted. It is very messy and contains many WP:OR angular diameters. The WP:OR angular diameters are likely inaccurate as well, since nebulae have undefined edges and are hard to measure due to that. SpaceImplorerExplorerImplorer 19:17, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think the best thing to do is remove the angular diameter section. Atlantlc27Lol (talk) 20:29, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Distances to stars for scale

Thinking of adding the distances to different stars on the list of comparison. What do you think? Atlantlc27Lol (talk) 01:38, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List FOR comparison I mean, sorry Atlantlc27Lol (talk) 01:38, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adding the Slug Nebula to the list

The Slug Nebula is a cloud of cold hydrogen emitting Lyman-alpha radiation near the quasar UM 287, and it is 2 million light years long. Should this be added to the list? 2603:6011:A300:510C:F641:49F2:8C99:6917 (talk) 21:03, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If there is a reliable source to back it up then I think it can be added. Atlantlc27Lol (talk) 22:28, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article/480/2/2094/5050385

-It is said to be the largest and most luminous lyman-alpha nebula

-It is said to be 450 kiloparsecs across (1.5 million light years). Orangefanta120 (talk) 23:01, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Some more nebulae that could be added

-Maggie (gas cloud) / 3,900 ly (1,200 pc). Source: https://www.aanda.org/articles/aa/full_html/2022/01/aa41265-21.html

-Sagittarius B2 (gas cloud) / 150 ly (46 pc). Source: https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg16422144-900-star-attraction/

-Perseus-Taurus Shell (molecular cloud) / 509 ly (156 pc). Source: https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/2041-8213/acf95

-TON 618 LaB (Lyman-alpha blob) / 326,200 ly (100,000 pc). Source: https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/2041-8213/ac390d

-Q2343-BX418 Halo cloud (gas cloud) / 150,000 ly (46,000 pc). Source: https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/2041-8213/aacff6

-RO-1001 LaB (lyman-alpha blob) / 978,500 ly (300,000 pc). Source: https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021A%26A...649A..78D/abstract

-Jackpot Nebula (lyman-alpha blob, surrounds 4 quasars) / 1,011,000 ly (310,000 pc). Source: https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022maff.confE..71V/abstract

-Stephan's Quintet gas cloud (hydrogen gas cloud) / 1,957,000 ly (600,000 pc). Source: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-05206-x Orangefanta120 (talk) 01:09, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]