Talk:Messier 56

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was Move all. —Wknight94 (talk) 23:17, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

Globular Cluster M2 to Messier 2
Globular Cluster M4 to Messier 4
Globular Cluster M9 to Messier 9
Open Cluster M21 to Messier 21
Open Cluster M26 to Messier 26
Dwarf Elliptical Galaxy M32 to Messier 32
Open Cluster M34 to Messier 34
Open Cluster M35 to Messier 35
Open Cluster M36 to Messier 36
Open Cluster M37 to Messier 37
Open Cluster M39 to Messier 39
Open Cluster M41 to Messier 41
M43 (nebula) to Messier 43
Open Cluster M46 to Messier 46
Open Cluster M47 to Messier 47
Open Cluster M48 to Messier 48
Open Cluster M50 to Messier 50
Open Cluster M52 to Messier 52
Globular Cluster M53 to Messier 53
Globular Cluster M54 to Messier 54
Globular Cluster M55 to Messier 55
Globular Cluster M56 to Messier 56
Spiral Galaxy M66 to Messier 66
Open Cluster M67 to Messier 67
Globular Cluster M68 to Messier 68
Globular Cluster M69 to Messier 69
Globular Cluster M70 to Messier 70
Globular Cluster M72 to Messier 72
M73 (star group) to Messier 73
Globular Cluster M75 to Messier 75
Lenticular Galaxy M84 to Messier 84
Elliptical Galaxy M87 to Messier 87
Spiral Galaxy M91 to Messier 91
Globular Cluster M92 to Messier 92
Open Cluster M93 to Messier 93
Spiral Galaxy M100 to Messier 100
Open Cluster M103 to Messier 103
Dwarf Elliptical Galaxy M110 to Messier 110
Most of these go against the typical Wikipedia convention to disambiguate articles by using parentheses after the article name, and discussion on WikiProject Astronomical objects has come to the view that the format should be Messier #. Many of the destination pages are redirects with more than one item in the history. Chaos syndrome 20:38, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Please discuss this move at Talk:Globular Cluster M2.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Claim that it originated from same dwarf galaxy as Omega Centauri doesn’t seem to be supported.

In the article it says “The properties of this cluster suggest that it may have been acquired during the merger of a dwarf galaxy, of which Omega Centauri forms the surviving nucleus.” and “ M56 is part of the Gaia Sausage, the hypothesised remains of a merged dwarf galaxy.”

However, while the latter claim is supported by the given reference (14, Meyong et.al), the former claim does neither seem to be supported by the nearest reference (7, Forbes et.al) nor by (14), which doesn’t list Omega Centauri as belonging to the Gaia Sausage. And neither does the Wikipedia page on the Gaia Sausage mention Omega Centauri, nor vice-versa.

Therefore I believe the „of which Omega Centauri forms the surviving nucleus.” should be deleted. Babarr (talk) 06:17, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]