User talk:Johndric Valdez
- 1 Regarding your complaint about my UY Scuti size comparison
- 2 Recent edits to VY Canis Majoris
- 3 June 2013
- 4 July 2013
- 5 A barnstar for you!
- 6 UY Scuti
- 7 Disambiguation link notification for October 10
- 8 W1-26 in x-rays
- 9 Disambiguation link notification for November 23
- 10 1881 Haiphong Typhoon
- 11 Your submission at Articles for creation: Lyman-alpha blob 1
- 12 Her-Crb Great Wall
- 13 A barnstar for you!
- 14 DYK for Lyman-alpha blob 1
- 15 Galaxy sizes
- 16 Reference Errors on 10 April
Hello I'm Shixxor. You recently updated my talk page with a complaint about my size comparison between the Sun and UY Scuti. You stated that the Sun was invisible to you. In fact the sun is there if you look closely. I chose to make the Sun exactly 1 screen pixel in size so I could show the star UY Scuti in its entireness at a reasonable screen width. However, I noticed that my measurements for the comparison were not correct. I will create a new image, with the Sun again at 1 pixel size but I will also include a small thumbnail of a higher magnification so the size of the sun becomes more apparent. Shixxor (talk) 13:46, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
Recent edits to VY Canis Majoris
Hello, and thank you for your recent contributions. I appreciate the effort you made for our project, but unfortunately I had to undo your edit(s) because I believe the article was better before you made that change. Feel free to contact me directly if you have any questions. Thank you! bender235 (talk) 15:26, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to NML Cygni may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)
Hello, I'm Tarlneustaedter. I noticed that you made a change to an article, VY_Canis_Majoris, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Please cite references for all changes you make, and verify against references that are already present. Tarl.Neustaedter (talk) 18:45, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|The Original Barnstar|
|You did a good job on the article UY Scuti Cat 5120 (talk) 12:03, 11 September 2013 (UTC)|
Sorry for the "Physical characteristics" thing. Anyway, as you'll see I've added some data taken from the same reference to the star. Let's hope she's more researched in the future.
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited ESO 146-5, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Quadrillion (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
W1-26 in x-rays
This is a red supergiant. It doesn't emit x-rays and is not visible in the new x-ray image. Stars in general don't produce x-rays in any great quantity because they simply aren't hot enough, but stars with fast winds (eg. Wolf Rayet) can produce x-rays from shocks with interstellar material. Two stars with hot fast winds in close proximity can be very strong x-ray sources as winds collide and this is a potent test for binary status in the most massive stars. Some of the x-ray sources in the Westerlund 1 image are from this type of binary. All the bright x-ray sources are identified in the paper associated with that image, but note that the paper uses a different numbering system and item 26 is not W1-26: http://oro.open.ac.uk/12063/ Lithopsian (talk) 16:07, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hercules-Corona Borealis Great Wall, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Discovery (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
1881 Haiphong Typhoon
Hi, I see you've been making good faith edits saying this was the deadliest Phillipines Typhoon, et cetera. That may be, I have no idea. However, unless you add what wikipedia defines as reliable sources to your edits no one else has any idea, either. Please provide some of what wikipedia defines as reliable sources to your changes. I think I reverted one, and might revert the others also if they are not supported with sources. Thanks for your attention NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 00:52, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
Your submission at Articles for creation: Lyman-alpha blob 1
Her-Crb Great Wall
A barnstar for you!
|The Original Barnstar|
|You definitely deserve this for your work on both creating and expanding articles on very notable topics that other Wikipedians seem to have somehow missed. StringTheory11 (t • c) 18:01, 18 January 2014 (UTC)|
DYK for Lyman-alpha blob 1
|On 23 January 2014, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Lyman-alpha blob 1, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Lyman-alpha blob 1 is a blob of gas 300,000 light-years across located some 11.5 billion light-years from Earth? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Lyman-alpha blob 1. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.|
Hello. I appreciate your enthusiasm regarding massive galaxies, but you have to be more careful with how you are computing the physical sizes of things. I had to blank the whole "size" section of NGC 6251 because it was written with a very incorrect size for the galaxy. With an apparent diameter of ~2', and a distance of ~100 Mpc, it's about 50kpc across (the diffuse light may extend further, but not hugely so). Quite large, but nowhere near the 10 Mly you quoted.
I'm also editing IC 1101, because I have no idea where the 6 Mly size for that came from. The cited paper (Clarke, Blanton & Sarazin 2004) gives 600kpc as the extent of the diffuse light, which comes from the earlier Uson, Bough & Kuhn (1991) ~300" diffuse light radius and modern distance of 320Mpc. I don't know if I'd really call that the "size" of such a galaxy, but even if I did, that's only ~2 Mly. Sadly, there are now hundreds of pages across the web citing its size as 6Mly, so I think we have a case of Citogenesis here... - Parejkoj (talk) 04:47, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
- I replied to your comment at my talk. We'll have the conversation there. I also reverted your revert, per my explanation on my talk. - Parejkoj (talk) 16:51, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
Reference Errors on 10 April
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows: