Talk:List of NGC objects (5001–6000)
Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject icon 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
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
.jpg){kind=link}
WikiProject icon 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.
Do listed NGC objects require their own page?
[edit ]Do listed NGC objects require their own page? Do they require independent notability?
See Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:NGC 5582.
--SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:41, 22 February 2021 (UTC) [reply ]
- WP:NASTRO says they do require independent notability to have their own article. It doesn't seem to me to be worth including items in this list that don't have articles; then we're just duplicating the boring parts of the catalog. -- Beland (talk) 21:34, 4 January 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
- The lists should include every object, boring or not, otherwise the list is incomplete. C messier (talk) 14:42, 31 January 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
- If readers want a complete list, they can just look at one of the cited astronomical databases. It does seem if we're keeping non-notable objects off the list, maybe the title and definitely the intro should be changed to clarify that this is a list of notable NGC objects. That said, I don't have particularly strong feelings. Perhaps gathering a sampling of opinion from e.g. Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Astronomy would be helpful. -- Beland (talk) 21:11, 31 January 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
- Keep in mind selection criteria should be unambiguous, objective, and supported by reliable sources (WP:LISTCRITERIA). C messier (talk) 09:58, 1 February 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
- If readers want a complete list, they can just look at one of the cited astronomical databases. It does seem if we're keeping non-notable objects off the list, maybe the title and definitely the intro should be changed to clarify that this is a list of notable NGC objects. That said, I don't have particularly strong feelings. Perhaps gathering a sampling of opinion from e.g. Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Astronomy would be helpful. -- Beland (talk) 21:11, 31 January 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
- The lists should include every object, boring or not, otherwise the list is incomplete. C messier (talk) 14:42, 31 January 2025 (UTC) [reply ]
Move discussion in progress
[edit ]There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:IC 4381 which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 00:09, 26 April 2024 (UTC) [reply ]
Categories:
- List-Class List articles
- Unknown-importance List articles
- WikiProject Lists articles
- List-Class Astronomy articles
- Low-importance Astronomy articles
- List-Class Astronomy articles of Low-importance
- List-Class Astronomical objects articles
- Pages within the scope of WikiProject Astronomical objects (WP Astronomy Banner)