Talk:Snowflake Cluster
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
.jpg){kind=small}
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment[edit]
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Aschiffman10.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 09:34, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Plagiarism?[edit]
Much of the text in this article appears to be copied directly from the Spitzer Space Telescope news release. The entire article should be rewritten, although a better choice might be to delete this article altogether since this object is part of NGC 2264 which is covered in a separate article. The "snowflake cluster" is probably not sufficiently noteworthy to justify its own entry separate from the article on NGC 2264. Aldebarium (talk) 18:42, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
- I've removed the obviously plagiarised material. I actually only commented it out since it is not copyright and a small amount of work would make it usable. There isn't much left, and none of it is cited. I wouldn't object to a merge - a redirect with this name would be quite enough. Although at this point, NGC 2264 itself is hardly more than a stub. Lithopsian (talk) 21:16, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks. A merge & redirect sounds like the right approach although I don't know how to do it. Aldebarium (talk) 22:50, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
- Easy for anyone. Edit NGC 2264 to contain anything you want to say about the Snowflake Cluster. Then blank this article and turn it into a redirect page (just copying another redirect may be easier than reading all the documentation, the syntax is very simple). That's being bold, but not especially bold given that there is almost nothing left here. Alternatively, you could add tags to this page and that to start a merge discussion, which could be quite a lonely thing on a sparsely-watched article like this. I'd just go for it, things can always be put back if there are objections. Lithopsian (talk) 23:05, 24 February 2018 (UTC)