Talk:Andromeda Galaxy

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Andromeda Galaxy 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, 2: 30 days

Andromeda Galaxy 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 8, 2006	Peer review	Reviewed
June 15, 2006	Good article nominee	Listed
July 12, 2009	Good article reassessment	Kept

Current status: Good article

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".

Discovery of the M31 [OIII] emission arc[edit]

Added a new section, based on a new discovery associated with M31. As more is known about it, this will likely spin off onto its own page, but am adding here now as a placeholder. Is exciting stuff, and a great time to be alive.

Barred galaxy?[edit]

Andromeda is classified as SA(s)b on this page, which is correctly cited to NASA/IPAC EXTRAGALACTIC DATABASE. But doesn't that mean it is an unbarred spiral? If so, the first sentence on this page should be changed, as it conflicts with this information. Juicebox87 (talk) 18:36, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Andromeda Galaxy has a bar structure in its central region, though it is not as conspicuous as it is small and surrounded by a more prominent, boxy bulge (see this paper). SkyFlubbler (talk) 17:00, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Distance from earth is wrong[edit]

is approximately 30 billion light years (source exoplanet app) << this is wrong. Its 2.537 million light years according to -> https://www.nasa.gov/image-article/galaxy-next-door/#:~:text=At%20approximately%202.5%20million%20light,Milky%20Way's%20largest%20galactic%20neighbor. Vivaxe (talk) 07:08, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lead image[edit]

@Jackarrrr, FlightTime, and CactiStaccingCrane: In regards to Jackarrr's edit warring, I wanted to urge them to revert their edit warring and start a discussion if they continue to believe the other image is superior. For broader context, there is discussion here already, and the previous user who insisted on edit warring over the image is now banned from editing this page. Cerebral726 (talk) 16:12, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jackarrrr, discuss with me here. I'm the one that made the original proposal for the image. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 16:19, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello.

I was looking at the history logs while I was just editing Andromeda galaxy, and I noticed that the new image by Daviddayag was such a high quality image, so I thought it over, and just thought it would be more appealing to new readers on Wikipedia.

Ive read some other peoples reaction's, and I understand where some peoples opinion stands.

Thanks!

Jackarrr Jackarrrr (talk) 18:27, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, after reviewing some comments, I understand that some people are very strong with where they stand, but Daviddayag's image captured by his 11' telescope is not that different from ESA Hubbles image of Andromeda. Jackarrrr (talk) 19:42, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just for the record, I have no preference either way, just wanted to see a discussion on a major change to the page. Cheers, - FlightTime (open channel) — Preceding undated comment added 20:18, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My main rationale for this picture is consistency. The processed images certainly do look great, but they are infinite ways of mixing and manipulating the color channels that I felt that it is not a image of a real object. Conversely, there's only one true-color version of Andromeda and is also the color that you will see if you have a clear filter in the telescope. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 01:54, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

if you say that about you image, then wouldn't it be okay if your image was somewhere else on the article? With the original image, the description says he used Halpha to capture his Andromeda image. Its not like he just said it was captured by a normal telescope. He presented what he used and wasn't misleading.

Sorry if this comment sounds pushy. Jackarrrr (talk) 14:14, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

Just a question, but why do you stick with the new Andromeda image.

Also, why do you revert me or others every time we try to put the original image back?

Best regards Jackarrrr (talk) 01:30, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Cerebral726 Jackarrrr (talk) 01:31, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lack of consensus to change the image, as I explained originally. There was a discussion, and the user who was banned from editing this page tried to edit war for its inclusion. If it's going to be changed, it needs to be with a consensus first, rather than forced in through edit warring. Cerebral726 (talk) 01:59, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have fully-protected the article for 24 hours, to forestall any further edit warring and ensure an agreement is reached here. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:20, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For an image choosen to represent the "true" color of the Andromeda Galaxy this isn't the right choise, as the galaxy appears brownish in color cameras and in the choosen image it looks blueish. This image IMHO is a better representation of the galaxy. --C messier (talk) 07:14, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ritchie333: Can you please protect the article again, logged out users are still forcing their preferred version. - FlightTime (open channel) 16:21, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll wait and see if there are any further reverts past the ones today, if that's okay. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 21:13, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]