This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Galaxy morphological classification article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1Auto-archiving period: 90 days |
This
level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
A summary of this article appears in Galaxy. |
The article Disc galaxy is just a one sentence definition that I think gets better context in this general article about galaxy classification. I don't see how Disc galaxy could be expanded beyond a definition without duplicating other related articles; we already have an article for the disc component of the galaxy: Disc (galaxy). Since Wikipedia is not a dictionary, I think there's a clear case to merge into this article. Forbes72 ( talk) 21:01, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
I removed the merger hatnote from August 2015 here and here. There is no agreement or initiative to merge Disc galaxy (type) with Disc (galaxy) (component) or with Galaxy morphological classification (this aricle). Instead I'll post it on WT:AST (link to post to be followed) to ask a wider audience, OK? Rfassbind – talk 10:51, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Galaxy morphological classification. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 07:16, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
The article doesn't mention the Van Den Bergh luminosity class and I don't see it mentioned elsewhere on Wikipedia. [1] [2] [3] Could that be covered? Praemonitus ( talk) 00:43, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
Susu 2405:205:C8E3:96BC:182A:DC0F:AF0C:55B7 ( talk) 11:21, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Galaxy morphological classification article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1Auto-archiving period: 90 days |
This
level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
A summary of this article appears in Galaxy. |
The article Disc galaxy is just a one sentence definition that I think gets better context in this general article about galaxy classification. I don't see how Disc galaxy could be expanded beyond a definition without duplicating other related articles; we already have an article for the disc component of the galaxy: Disc (galaxy). Since Wikipedia is not a dictionary, I think there's a clear case to merge into this article. Forbes72 ( talk) 21:01, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
I removed the merger hatnote from August 2015 here and here. There is no agreement or initiative to merge Disc galaxy (type) with Disc (galaxy) (component) or with Galaxy morphological classification (this aricle). Instead I'll post it on WT:AST (link to post to be followed) to ask a wider audience, OK? Rfassbind – talk 10:51, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Galaxy morphological classification. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 07:16, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
The article doesn't mention the Van Den Bergh luminosity class and I don't see it mentioned elsewhere on Wikipedia. [1] [2] [3] Could that be covered? Praemonitus ( talk) 00:43, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
Susu 2405:205:C8E3:96BC:182A:DC0F:AF0C:55B7 ( talk) 11:21, 11 January 2023 (UTC)