Talk:Pleiades

Please place new discussions at the bottom of the talk page.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Pleiades 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: 1: 90 days

Pleiades was one of the Natural sciences good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
October 16, 2005	Peer review	Reviewed
December 16, 2005	Good article nominee	Listed
March 2, 2009	Good article reassessment	Kept
November 27, 2023	Good article reassessment	Delisted
Current status: Delisted good article

Astronomy: Astronomical objects / Constellations 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 articles
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 Constellations task force.

More named star in the Pleiades?

I no longer have this series of books, but the famous "Burnham's Celestial Handbook" lists something like a dozen named stars. From memory, there is one that has a masculine name. Hector, I think ???? 2001:8003:E41C:1C01:D085:6CCD:5320:E595 (talk) 12:58, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have the book and it list only the names shown in the table in the article (plus 18 Tauri, which I have added). Are you thinking of Atlas? Lithopsian (talk) 19:11, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Atlas, not Hector, you are quite correct. It was a long time ago LOL. 2001:8003:E40F:9601:DC93:764B:46B9:A8DE (talk) 11:55, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mesopotamia

It is also at this time that the first occurrence of the name M 45 dates back, i.e. kà-ma-tù = mul.MUL.

Would Roland E. Laffitte (talk · contribs) kindly explain this sentence, and how the "45" fits in? One might otherwise naïvely suppose that "M 45" originated in the Messier catalog of 1774, in which the Pleiades were the 45th entry. —Tamfang (talk) 13:37, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

M45 = Messier 45. Even then the sentence is a little hard to decipher. Lithopsian (talk) 13:46, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I know that. My question was: how do you get "45" out of kà-ma-tù = mul.MUL ? (granting that both at least contain m) —Tamfang (talk) 02:40, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that at least is foolish, so I've removed it. Lithopsian (talk) 17:04, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA Reassessment

Pleiades

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • GAN review not found

Result: Delisted. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 23:26, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This 2005 listing contains significant uncited material, violating GA criterion 2. Hopefully an easy fix, if someone has references to hand. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:43, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a few sources to some unsourced statements and fixed a bit, but I don't think I'll be able to completely fix the article; I think a more experienced editor would be up to the task. Blue Jay (talk) 12:11, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The Great Jay

I have always been fascinated by J what with it being the first letter of my first name, not relevant I know. Later in life reading theoretical mathematics my own idea and learning that it was a symbol used to represent the square root of -1. Again nto relevant information. I guess I have no real point except for I will look out for this day and remember it. JonathanRogerAsh (talk) 19:34, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've sent you a welcome message on your talk page. The talk page for articles (such as this one) are just for the improvement of the article. Tayste (edits) 19:56, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Visibility of reflection nebula

This is POV so obviously cant go into the main article, but the Merope nebula was easily seen in 20cm binoculars. That is, a pair of reflecting telescopes of 20cm diameter, so by any definition, "giant binoculars". Immeidately afterwards, the nebula was only barely visible in a single 45cm telescope, ie, with monocular vision. The conclusion is inescapable that binocular vision is essential to properly see this nebula. 2001:8003:E40F:9601:DC93:764B:46B9:A8DE (talk) 11:54, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]