User talk:Galaxybeing

This is Galaxybeing's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: NGC 5790 has been accepted

NGC 5790, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Theroadislong (talk) 16:22, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:NGC 5896 has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:NGC 5896. Thanks! Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 12:53, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: NGC 5896 has been accepted

NGC 5896, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 12:53, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:IC 4141 has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:IC 4141. Thanks! Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 13:54, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: IC 4141 has been accepted

IC 4141, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 13:55, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: NGC 5940 has been accepted

NGC 5940, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Jamiebuba (talk) 07:52, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: NGC 5920 has been accepted

NGC 5920, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 21% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Qcne (talk) 09:06, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: NGC 3647 has been accepted

NGC 3647, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Qcne (talk) 09:06, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: IC 4223 has been accepted

IC 4223, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Qcne (talk) 09:06, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: IC 4271 has been accepted

IC 4271, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Qcne (talk) 09:06, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: MCG-01-24-014 has been accepted

MCG-01-24-014, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Jamiebuba (talk) 09:35, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:LEDA 1026855 has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:LEDA 1026855. Thanks! Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 18:26, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: LEDA 1026855 has been accepted

LEDA 1026855, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 18:47, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: NGC 2606 has been accepted

NGC 2606, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Qcne (talk) 07:10, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: NGC 2603 has been accepted

NGC 2603, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Qcne (talk) 07:10, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: NGC 3908 has been accepted

NGC 3908, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Qcne (talk) 07:10, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: IC 21 has been accepted

IC 21, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Qcne (talk) 09:50, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: NGC 5535 has been accepted

NGC 5535, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Qcne (talk) 09:50, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: NGC 5539 has been accepted

NGC 5539, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Qcne (talk) 09:50, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: NGC 2688 has been accepted

NGC 2688, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Qcne (talk) 10:04, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: LEDA 1245565 has been accepted

LEDA 1245565, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Qcne (talk) 14:27, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: MCG-03-04-014 has been accepted

MCG-03-04-014, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Qcne (talk) 14:35, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: PGC 2046648 has been accepted

PGC 2046648, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Qcne (talk) 15:47, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: PGC 2387685 has been accepted

PGC 2387685, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Qcne (talk) 15:48, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: PGC 65543 has been accepted

PGC 65543, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Theroadislong (talk) 08:05, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: PGC 29820 has been accepted

PGC 29820, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Theroadislong (talk) 08:06, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: PGC 1228197 has been accepted

PGC 1228197, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Theroadislong (talk) 08:07, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: NGC 4991 has been accepted

NGC 4991, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Theroadislong (talk) 08:07, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: PGC 4789 has been accepted

PGC 4789, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Qcne (talk) 09:44, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: UGC 717 has been accepted

UGC 717, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Qcne (talk) 09:44, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: CGCG 396-2 has been accepted

CGCG 396-2, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Qcne (talk) 09:45, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: IC 3971 has been accepted

IC 3971, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Qcne (talk) 09:45, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Original Research in your various Galaxy drafts

Hi @Galaxybeing!

Thanks for writing these various galaxy drafts.

I just wanted to point out a small issue I've been correcting as I've been accepting these: sometimes you write what looks to be original research, i.e. describing the galaxy or its interactions with neighbours or placement. Sometimes you're quoting a source but it still does not make it clear that you are quoting the source instead of writing it in the Wikivoice.

To combat this, either don't make assertations or assumptions about the galaxy, or say something like "According to a study...".

Happy editing! Qcne (talk) 09:54, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited NGC 435, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page SDSS. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 17:54, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

IC 3971

Hi, ive reviewed this article as part of New Page Patrol. Just a minor issue - can you please fix reference 5? regards Atlantic306 (talk) 20:31, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Arp 146 has been accepted

Arp 146, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Qcne (talk) 12:02, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wow

You've created a lot of articles, keep up the good work! User:Hamterous1 (discuss anything!🐹✈️) 00:28, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Astrobin and other self-published sources

Please refrain from using self-published sources like astrobin and various forums because self-published sources are largely not acceptable as reliable sources. --C messier (talk) 09:21, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of IC 21 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article IC 21 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IC 21 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

C messier (talk) 15:45, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on NGC 2491

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page NGC 2491, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A bare URL error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 06:39, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A cup of tea for you!

Great job on IC 1185! It's always good to see astronomy-focused editors. Happy editing! —asparagusus (interaction) ^sprouts! 13:32, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on NGC 3750

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page NGC 3750, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A bare URL error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 05:42, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on NGC 945

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page NGC 945, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A bare URL error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 02:03, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on NGC 646

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page NGC 646, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A bare URL error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 02:31, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of IC 3625

The article IC 3625 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No apparent secondary sources. Nothing obvious in google.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Stuartyeates (talk) 20:30, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on IC 5145

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page IC 5145, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A bare URL error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 04:25, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

galaxy article notability

Hello. It's not clear that you're checking your own talk page, as I don't see any responses from you above, but I'm posting to warn you in advance that I plan to file a mass deletion request for many of your new galaxy articles. You haven't established notability for most of these objects: just being in a catalog doesn't make a galaxy notable. Please read the astronomical object notability guidelines before you create any more article stubs of cataloged sources that have no other secondary sources. - Parejkoj (talk) 16:49, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've filed the AfD, and will keep adding articles to it as I can. Please comment there about why you think these articles are notable: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2MASX J22550681+0058396. - Parejkoj (talk) 17:34, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of 2MASX J22550681+0058396 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2MASX J22550681+0058396, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2MASX J22550681+0058396 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Interlanguage links

Hi there! When you create a new article, please could you link it to other language versions of the same topic by using the "Add interlanguage links" button in the toolbar. I have done this for several of your new galaxy articles. Thanks — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:30, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Did you read this request? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:08, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah but I'm not sure how to add interlanguage links. Galaxybeing (talk) 04:55, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One way is to press "Add interlanguage links" in the toolbar - can you see this. Another way is to find it on Wikidata (search here) and then add it as a sitelink. This then provides all the links to the articles in other languages. I am happy to help you — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:34, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks man Galaxybeing (talk) 08:45, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A question

When you create new pages, I see that you alternate between several different edit summaries. I wonder why you switch between them when creating pages? User:Hamterous1 ^{(discuss anything!🐹✈️)} 12:40, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Thanks for your contributions to galaxy pages! Keep up the good work :) Broc (talk) 08:42, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

May 2024

Your edit to PKS 2215+020 has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for information on how to contribute your work appropriately. For legal reasons, Wikipedia strictly cannot host copyrighted text or images from print media or digital platforms without an appropriate and verifiable license. Contributions infringing on copyright will be removed. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. Broc (talk) 08:22, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of IC 3786 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article IC 3786 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IC 3786 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

C messier (talk) 15:18, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of IC 4000 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article IC 4000 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IC 4000 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

C messier (talk) 15:22, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of IC 42 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article IC 42 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IC 42 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

C messier (talk) 16:26, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of IC 158 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article IC 158 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IC 158 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

C messier (talk) 16:26, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of IC 3971 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article IC 3971 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IC 3971 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

C messier (talk) 16:26, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of IC 3686 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article IC 3686 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IC 3686 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

C messier (talk) 16:26, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of IC 3402 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article IC 3402 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IC 3402 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

C messier (talk) 16:26, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi Galaxybeing. Thank you for your work on SBSS 0953+549. Another editor, CanonNi, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Great start. Assessed as C-class.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|CanonNi}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

'''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 10:29, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of SBSS 0953+549 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article SBSS 0953+549 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SBSS 0953+549 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Parejkoj (talk) 18:06, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of IC 3278 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article IC 3278, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IC 3278 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of IC 3222 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article IC 3222, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IC 3222 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of IC 3053 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article IC 3053, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IC 3053 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of IC 848 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article IC 848, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IC 848 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of IC 838 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article IC 838, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IC 838 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 2024

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at RX J2129.7+0005 BCG. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 13:01, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry for making disruptive edits. I know I tried but it isn't the way. Maybe I can give the task to u in adding any reliable sources u can find for RX J2129.7+0005 this time, thank you. Galaxybeing (talk) 13:12, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok but please explain your reverts ‹hamster717🐉› ^{(discuss anything!🐹✈️ • my contribs🌌🌠)} 13:16, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted these articles since I though it is better to paraphrase the sentences myself in order to avoid copyright issues. Galaxybeing (talk) 13:35, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, don't give that task to me. I don't want it. As User:Hamterous1 says, you need to explain your edits, but why would you go and revert an experienced user like Aldebarium without even paying attention to what they say? It's also rude. Drmies (talk) 13:27, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I never meant be disruptive. Although I actually tried paraphrasing these sentences myself I should handle this to experienced users instead. Galaxybeing (talk) 13:32, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Parejkoj, User:Aldebarium, we're really in disruptive territory here, and the "paraphrases" I looked at were inept. Drmies (talk) 13:03, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know about copyright violations (I'll take User:Aldebarium's word for it), but I think this is yet another page that should be nominated for deletion (there is little significant coverage of the object outside of catalogs). The wording of other new pages by Galaxybeing has often been rather awkward, and I've not bothered to check it for accuracy (since they're usually catalog summaries, which require a lot of digging to fact check).

Galaxybeing: I've asked you this on the deletion discussions and not gotten a response. I think it would be very helpful if you could explain how you choose objects to write articles about, and how you go about writing those articles? You don't distinguish between papers about a specific object and catalog papers. I'm curious how you come up with your summaries of information from catalogs? If we understand your process better, we might be able to help you pick more notable objects and produce better pages. - Parejkoj (talk) 17:07, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Parejkoj, I choose these objects to write astronomy articles about since I've shown a strong enthusiasm in improving Wikipedia like Aldebarium said, in which I came up with summaries of information from these catalogues based from sources I found on individual objects from SIMBAD. But the problem, is I confused papers about a special object with other papers and sometimes I take random bits from random articles to put inside thinking it could work for the article. It's not easy overall after all. Galaxybeing (talk) 02:19, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Hamterous1, did you see material that was copied word for word? That needs to be looked at for copyright violations... Drmies (talk) 13:28, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi User:Galaxybeing - I want to start by saying that I can see that you have a real enthusiasm for astronomy and an interest in improving Wikipedia, and that's all good. However, the content that you have been adding has been very problematic, for multiple reasons.

1) Many of the articles that you've created are on galaxies that have very low or marginal notability. Adding lots of articles like these doesn't really add much if any value to Wikipedia overall. You have seen that many of your articles have been nominated for deletion by other editors, and you should expect that this will continue to happen if you're writing about non-notable objects. Certainly, some of the objects you've written about are notable enough: I Zw 1 is a good example, but the majority of your articles are in the category of very low or marginal notability. A good way to check for this is to see if there are numerous journal articles about the specific object in question: not just catalog papers or large-sample papers that include the object as part of a big survey, but papers specifically focusing on studies of the individual object.

2) Some of your articles are rather long and include what looks like a lot of technical detail. In general, what you've written in these long and technical articles is just really poor quality text that should not be in Wikipedia. It seems that you are just copying information from the abstracts of journal articles without really understanding the scientific concepts or terminology that you are using, and the result is that much of what you have written in these articles is simply incorrect or just nonsensical. In many cases, you are taking text from a journal article about a study of a large sample of objects, and copying statements about the statistical properties of the sample into your WP article as though those statements apply to the individual galaxy or quasar that is the subject of your WP article. This seems to be happening over and over in your articles, and the result is terribly incorrect text that has no business being in a WP article. I suspect that this problem is happening because, in your enthusiasm to write long and detailed articles, you are simply including information that you don't actually understand at a technical level, so a lot of what you're putting into WP comes out as a kind of meaningless techno-babble that is just incorrect.

3) The biggest problem is that in many articles, you have copied text almost word-for-word from journal articles into these WP articles. This is strictly forbidden and you absolutely need to stop doing this, and delete any remaining text you've put into WP that was copied closely from journal articles or other sources. Having said that, I also want to emphasize that for the articles where I deleted a lot of your text, going back and paraphrasing that text is not a good solution either, because much of that text is presented in a way that is scientificially incorrect and nonsensical in the context of the specific WP article, or includes details that are totally irrelevant for a WP article. So, please do not try to salvage these articles by paraphrasing the text that you had previously copied from journal articles: that will not make these WP articles better.

My advice is that if you're working on articles on galaxies, stick to basic information: for example information such as galaxy redshift and distance, morphological classification, discovery history, AGN classification type. I would really caution you to not try to include a lot of detailed astrophysical information gleaned from journal papers, because as explained above, when you've added that kind of information into articles, what you've added is largely either irrelevant or totally wrong, and wrong information like that will get deleted from the article by other editors. Other editors will generally not have time or interest to "fix" incorrect information that you've added to articles by improving the factual presentation; instead, the best option for other editors is to simply delete the incorrect or irrelevant information that you've put into these articles. Aldebarium (talk) 17:39, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, thank you for taking your time to advise me. For future articles, it's best for me to stick to the basics and only add in specific information only if the object is mentioned. Research will also help me in determining whether these objects get significant coverage or not. I'll also take note that copying from every article is wrong since according to guidelines imposed by WP, we have to write our own words. I hope this comment of yours will help me learn from my mistakes and become a better editor. Galaxybeing (talk) 02:29, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply, but you are still continuing to add really low-quality, incorrect, and problematic material to Wikipedia. It looks like in the past couple of days you've created two new articles, on 4C +26.42 and UGC 711, and as before, you are writing long articles filled with what looks like a lot of technical detail, but most of the content of these articles is so bad that I would describe it as not even wrong. These articles contain a large amount of seemingly technically detailed astrophysical information that you're paraphrasing from published articles, but most of what you're writing is either irrelevant details that don't really belong in a WP article, or you're including information that's totally incorrect because again you don't seem to have a good understanding of the terminology or the astrophysics concepts that you are using. I do think that both of these galaxies are probably notable enough that it's fine for them to be the subjects of Wikipedia articles. But, once again, I would really urge you to keep your articles brief, stick to basic information such as what I suggested above, and please stop trying to include a lot of technical astrophysical detail about galaxies and quasars, because most of the information that you are adding to these articles is just really, really poor quality text that's scientifically incoherent and meaningless, and most of it is going to get deleted. Aldebarium (talk) 13:57, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Aldebarium, understand your concerns. Although the sources I found from SIMBAD does indirectly mentioned the galaxy or other objects, these information might be inputted wrongly since I'm not a good expert myself when deciding what to write for these some of articles; I only started a few months ago and there is a long way for me to learn. Instead, it's better for me to leave this issue to other experienced WP experts who knows best on what to add for these articles. Also WP is a collaboration effort so there's nothing bad for me to just include the basics for now or a bit of technical information that is easy for me to understand. Thank you. Galaxybeing (talk) 03:10, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Drmies, could we get some admin help here? Galaxybeing is continuing to create articles of non- or barely-notable objects without evidencing any understanding of either astronomy or of the distinction between catalog papers vs. papers about a specific object. I would propose that all pages that they have created so far be deleted; it would be a lot of work to sort through them to find the few that might be notable and then go through their references to clean them up and remove any inaccuracies. Many of these articles feel like something that e.g. ChatGPT would dump out, lacking in any topical expertise or understanding of context. - Parejkoj (talk) 16:45, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of IC 3275 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article IC 3275, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IC 3275 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of IC 3038 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article IC 3038, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IC 3038 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

July 2024

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing certain namespaces ((Article)) for mass creation of articles that do not meet our standards.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Drmies (talk) 20:13, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Galaxybeing (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I'm sorry for mass creating articles that fails to meet any editors' standards. Although I've been inspired to create new Wiki articles, I completely lacked the direction to distinguish what is a notable and non-notable article and also being unexperienced when adding information for articles, since I only joined a few months ago. Please unblock me so you can advise me, on what rules I could follow to ensure this incident never happens again in the future. Thanks </nowiki>Galaxybeing (talk) 00:40, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Creating articles is not the only task that can be done on Wikipedia, we have almost 7 million articles, most of which need editing and improvement. Editing existing articles is the best way to learn more about notability. You currently can make formal edit requests to existing articles; I would suggest that you spend some time doing that first before we can consider perhaps granting you access to edit articles yourself. You can also create and submit drafts via the article wizard, but my advice is to focus on existing articles first. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 07:31, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Might I suggest that we could relax the block to just creating new articles. That would give the opportunity for the editor to gain experience? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:15, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You might, MSGJ. 331dot, would you mind checking to see if I did so correctly? I've never placed such a block before--thanks! Drmies (talk) 20:26, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good to me — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:31, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Drmies I think you did too, I forgot we could do that now. 331dot (talk) 23:57, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of PKS 1148-001

The article PKS 1148-001 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Yet another non-notable astronomical object, with no sources of note.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of OGC 94

The article OGC 94 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Very obscure galaxy with no dedicated study on it; all the references are vast catalogues of thousands of galaxies. This article is also poorly written with technical flair that is nonsense or poorly worded.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. SkyFlubbler (talk) 15:40, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of 2MASX J07322028+3138009

The article 2MASX J07322028+3138009 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Very obscure galaxy with no dedicated study on it; all the references are vast catalogues of thousands of galaxies. This article is also poorly written with technical flair that is nonsense or poorly worded.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. SkyFlubbler (talk) 15:42, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Abell 1576 BCG

The article Abell 1576 BCG has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Very obscure galaxy with no dedicated study on it; all the references are vast catalogues of thousands of galaxies. This article is also poorly written with technical flair that is nonsense or poorly worded.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. SkyFlubbler (talk) 15:48, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Abell 697 BCG

The article Abell 697 BCG has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Very obscure galaxy with no dedicated study on it; all the references are vast catalogues of thousands of galaxies. This article is also poorly written with technical flair that is nonsense or poorly worded.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. SkyFlubbler (talk) 16:06, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of UGC 711

The article UGC 711 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Very obscure galaxy with no dedicated study on it; all the references are vast catalogues of thousands of galaxies. This article is also poorly written with technical flair that is nonsense or poorly worded.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. SkyFlubbler (talk) 16:12, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of RIQ J1336+1725

The article RIQ J1336+1725 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Obscure quasar with a lone reference with mere mention. Nothing significant and haa not been the subject of any dedicated study.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. SkyFlubbler (talk) 16:20, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of 7C 1415+2556

The article 7C 1415+2556 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Very obscure galaxy with no dedicated study on it; all the references are vast catalogues of thousands of galaxies.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. SkyFlubbler (talk) 16:25, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of PKS 2338+000

The article PKS 2338+000 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Very obscure galaxy with no dedicated study on it; all the references are vast catalogues of thousands of galaxies. This article is also poorly written with technical flair that is nonsense or poorly worded.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. SkyFlubbler (talk) 16:26, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of PKS 0537-286

The article PKS 0537-286 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Obscure quasar with no dedicated study and nothing more than just an entry among the hundreds of others in the references. Nothing significant about this object.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. SkyFlubbler (talk) 16:28, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of FDF 4683

The article FDF 4683 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Very obscure quasar with practically no existing references.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. SkyFlubbler (talk) 16:29, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of IC 2839

The article IC 2839 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Very obscure galaxy mentioned only in a handfull of vast catalogues of thousands of galaxies.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. C messier (talk) 21:03, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of IC 2816

The article IC 2816 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Very obscure galaxy mentioned only in a handfull of vast catalogues of thousands of galaxies.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. C messier (talk) 21:03, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of IC 2800

The article IC 2800 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Very obscure galaxy mentioned only in a handfull of vast catalogues of thousands of galaxies.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. C messier (talk) 21:03, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of IC 2734

The article IC 2734 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Very obscure galaxy mentioned only in a handfull of vast catalogues of thousands of galaxies.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. C messier (talk) 21:03, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of IC 2657

The article IC 2657 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Very obscure galaxy mentioned only in a handfull of vast catalogues of thousands of galaxies.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. C messier (talk) 21:03, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of IC 4160

The article IC 4160 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Very obscure galaxy mentioned only in a handfull of vast catalogues of thousands of galaxies with no significant commentary on the object.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. C messier (talk) 21:16, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of IC 4163

The article IC 4163 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Very obscure galaxy mentioned only in a handfull of vast catalogues of thousands of galaxies with no significant commentary on the object.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. C messier (talk) 21:16, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of IC 4017

The article IC 4017 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Very obscure galaxy mentioned only in a handfull of vast catalogues of thousands of galaxies with no significant commentary on the object.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. C messier (talk) 21:16, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of IC 3683

The article IC 3683 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Very obscure galaxy mentioned only in a handfull of vast catalogues of thousands of galaxies with no significant commentary on the object.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. C messier (talk) 21:16, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of IC 3482

The article IC 3482 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Very obscure galaxy mentioned only in a handfull of vast catalogues of thousands of galaxies with no significant commentary on the object.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. C messier (talk) 21:28, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Second unblock request

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Galaxybeing (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I'll like to revoke a partial block imposed on me. It was my fault for creating non-notable articles. I appreciate Wikipedia has its own set of rules us editors must follow especially Notability Guidelines for Astronomical Objects. For any objects to deserve their own article like a galaxy or a quasar, coverage must be specific and substantial. Being noted in databases or any of the general research papers that does not mentioned the subject directly is not going to work. There are millions or billions of objects in space and not all of them would be given their standalone article as Wikipedia is strict about these guidelines. They will just be deleted as nothing is known about them. If I were given a second chance to do a new Wikipedia article this time, I would change my approach and only choose objects that are potentially notable or are a subject of a news article where there is more coverage about them. If there is not much commentary about them, I wouldn't necessary create these articles in the first place. At the same time, I will also contribute to Wikipedia and make improvements to existing articles if necessary. I might not be one of the best editors but I would definitely improve time to time. Once again, I would like to revoke my partial block. Galaxybeing (talk) 06:34, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

No. Spend time editing existing articles constructively. After a few months and a demonstrated set of constructive edits, then and only then should you be contesting this partial block. Yamla (talk) 12:18, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

I think you mean "appeal" not "revoke" in your request above. Anyway there was agreement that it would be better if you would spend some time editing articles rather than creating new articles. You know you are not blocked from editing, right? But in the last two weeks you have not edited a single article. Why is that? Are you only interested in creating new articles? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 06:52, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I know that. I thought I was blocked by administrators from editing as well so didn't edited a single article until I realized about the agreement today. I felt bad for not creating any new articles since the incident two weeks ago. Although I can edit existing articles, I just want another shot in doing new articles the right way provided they meet Notability Guidelines on Wikipedia. Galaxybeing (talk) 07:21, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of IC 2754

The article IC 2754 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Very obscure galaxy mentioned only in a handfull of vast catalogues of thousands of galaxies with no significant commentary on the object.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of notable galaxies that don't have articles!

Hey there @Galaxybeing! I saw that a short time back you had asked an editor for a galaxy article that needs created. I had noticed that he never responded, so I took it upon myself to compile a relatively long list of notable galaxies that currently do not have articles (and I have citations that prove their notability). This list can be found here! You'll be the first person that I have given this list to, and I hope that this can help you continue your WikiJourney in a forward direction!

Also, this will still be here after a few months when you are ready to get back to article creation. :) Sir MemeGod ._. (talk - contribs - created articles) 04:58, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks man, really appreciative! Galaxybeing (talk) 05:26, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of IC 4481

The article IC 4481 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Very obscure galaxy mentioned only in a handfull of catalogues with no significant commentary on the object.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. C messier (talk) 07:12, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

UGC 6614

Hey, @Galaxybeing thank you for finding and working on this galaxy in a draft that I created and gave up working on 7 years ago as I was new to Wikipedia at the time and did not understand sources for expanding and making a good, well sourced article. I hope you make this draft really excellent, and I would like to see it as an very well written and sourced article. Keep up on the excellent work!

Also, are you going though the Simbad database sorting the papers by score because that it was I do when I am finding sources while creating or expanding an object in the NGC Catalogue which is what I work on. (I mainly do galaxies because They are my favorites astronomical objects to work on and they are easy for me to understand. In the future however I will be exspanding my plate to include Nebula, Star clusters and more!) Keep up the excellent work! Fucherastonmeym87 (talk) 18:54, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of IC 64

The article IC 64 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This galaxy is not notable, all of the references are to catalog entries.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:UGC 6614 has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:UGC 6614. Thanks! Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 14:29, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: UGC 6614 has been accepted

UGC 6614, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as B-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a fantastic rating for a new article, and places it among the top 3% of accepted submissions — major kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Cambalachero (talk) 17:41, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of IC 3789 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article IC 3789 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IC 3789 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

SkyFlubbler (talk) 20:45, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of PGC 2046648 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article PGC 2046648 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PGC 2046648 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

SkyFlubbler (talk) 20:49, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of MCG -01-24-014 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article MCG -01-24-014 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MCG -01-24-014 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Sir MemeGod :D (talk - contribs - created articles) 20:56, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of 2MASX J09133888-1019196 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2MASX J09133888-1019196 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2MASX J09133888-1019196 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

SkyFlubbler (talk) 21:00, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of 2MASX J22550681+0058396 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 2MASX J22550681+0058396 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2MASX J22550681+0058396 (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

SkyFlubbler (talk) 21:03, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of SDSSCGB 10189 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article SDSSCGB 10189 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SDSSCGB 10189 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

SkyFlubbler (talk) 21:10, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of SBSS 0953+549 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article SBSS 0953+549 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SBSS 0953+549 (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

SkyFlubbler (talk) 21:24, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of SDSS J082535.19+512706.3 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article SDSS J082535.19+512706.3 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SDSS J082535.19+512706.3 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

SkyFlubbler (talk) 15:10, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of PGC 2387685 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article PGC 2387685 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PGC 2387685 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

SkyFlubbler (talk) 15:18, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of NGC 4991 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article NGC 4991 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NGC 4991 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

SkyFlubbler (talk) 15:25, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of PGC 4789 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article PGC 4789 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PGC 4789 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

SkyFlubbler (talk) 15:29, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of UGC 717 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article UGC 717 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UGC 717 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

SkyFlubbler (talk) 15:30, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of CGCG 396-2 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article CGCG 396-2 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CGCG 396-2 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

SkyFlubbler (talk) 15:31, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of RX J2129.7+0005 BCG for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article RX J2129.7+0005 BCG is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RX J2129.7+0005 BCG until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

SkyFlubbler (talk) 15:38, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of SDSS J151451.78+311654.0 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article SDSS J151451.78+311654.0 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SDSS J151451.78+311654.0 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

SkyFlubbler (talk) 15:40, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

hi galaxybeing

I am currently turning the deleted articles into new redirects, as there is a new list of IC objects now ‹hamster717🐉› ^{(discuss anything!🐹✈️ • my contribs🌌🌠)} 22:23, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New unblock request

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Galaxybeing (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I would like to explain, @Drmies and @Parejkoj. I understand the reason I was blocked because I created obscure low quality articles of no encyclopedic value. I realize now my actions had violated the rules and will not repeat the mistakes from now on. I wish to assure you guys that I now fully understand the importance of following guidelines for WP:Notability (astronomical objects). During the past few months when I was under the block, I dedicated my time to improve existing articles on Wikipedia like Markarian 231 and 3C 171 in order to meet notability standards. I am writing to ask that my own account be unblocked with the understanding that I will ensure new articles related to astronomy objects will meet WP:NASTCRIT and WP:NASTRO guidelines and strictly avoid creating any new non-notable articles. I look forward to continue contributing to Wikipedia in a productive manner without any problems. Thank you for considering my request. Galaxybeing (talk) 07:53, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

Accepted with the conditions agree to by the user in this unblock request. Good luck and happy editing. Drmies (talk) 14:11, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:MSGJ, User:331dot, what do you think? Drmies (talk) 14:10, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. Recent edits look promising — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:43, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Seems okay to me, yes. 331dot (talk) 14:48, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Drmies, happy to wrap this one up with an unblock? Daniel (talk) 10:41, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of PKS 0805-07 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article PKS 0805-07 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PKS 0805-07 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Sir MemeGod  13:53, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of PSS J0248+1802 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article PSS J0248+1802 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PSS J0248+1802 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Sir MemeGod  13:53, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of IC 4141 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article IC 4141 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IC 4141 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Sir MemeGod  14:01, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of 2MASX J00423991+3017515

The article 2MASX J00423991+3017515 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No notability besides one independent journal that I could find.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Sir MemeGod  14:23, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of IC 3078 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article IC 3078 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IC 3078 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Sir MemeGod  15:04, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of IC 4026 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article IC 4026 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IC 4026 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Sir MemeGod  15:06, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of IC 4516 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article IC 4516 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IC 4516 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Sir MemeGod  15:08, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of IC 3622 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article IC 3622 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IC 3622 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Sir MemeGod  15:36, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of PG 1543+489 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article PG 1543+489 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PG 1543+489 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Sir MemeGod  16:45, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for SDSS J0849+1114

On 25 September 2024, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article SDSS J0849+1114, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that light travelled 1.06 billion light-years from a trio of galaxies in the constellation of Cancer, where three supermassive black holes were colliding? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/SDSS J0849+1114. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, SDSS J0849+1114), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Sir MemeGod  14:54, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

hi galaxybeing...again!

nice job on creating articles! keep up the good work! ‹hamster717🐉› ^{(discuss anything!🐹✈️ • my contribs🌌🌠)} 00:22, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks mate! Galaxybeing (talk) 03:00, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your articles

I'm sorry, but I have to ask again what your process is for writing new astronomy pages? Do you read and understand the articles you are citing? Are you asking a chat-LLM prompter to generate them for you? Taking one of the most recent examples, IRAS 07598+6508, it comes off as a Word salad, with a mix of links to catalog papers and some papers that specifically discuss the object, and the text doesn't make sense in many cases, let alone whether I trust the claimed facts. For example: "Furthermore, a point-like nuclear emission is detected in three infrared bands, although faint emission is seen. This indicates the nuclear emission might be well connected to star formation." - what do you mean by this? Parejkoj (talk) 17:29, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To follow up on this- I appreciate that you have a lot of enthusiasm for this subject and that you are creating articles in good faith. However, some of what you're writing is just nonsense. I just deleted a bunch of text from your article on Mrk 876 because what was written was incorrect and meaningless. I do believe that Mrk 876 has sufficient notability to justify having an article about it, but as we've discussed before, the problem seems to be that you are trying to incorporate a lot of detailed astrophysical information that you just don't really understand well, so when you are summarizing information that you find in journal articles, you are getting a lot of it wrong, using terms incorrectly, and writing things that just don't make sense. I would just urge you to stick to basic information that you understand well, and don't try to include detailed astrophysical data or results that you don't understand. Aldebarium (talk) 20:20, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I admit that I don't understand some of the difficult concepts because it involves dissecting the key information required for the article that is to be written and sometimes I might input it wrongly. I'll take your advice and only write articles with only a few detailed data/results and basic information I known so far from now on. If I still need any further help, then I could head to the teahouse for some advice. Galaxybeing (talk) 00:56, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't understand the concepts, how are you producing the text? - Parejkoj (talk) 02:48, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I acknowledge that I will still produce the text for information and basic concepts I'm familiar with. I never meant to say I don't understand all of the concepts. If you don't mind, it's better for me to listen to @Aldebarium's advice until I understand more difficult concepts. Galaxybeing (talk) 03:39, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussion about IRAS 13349+1428

Hello, Galaxybeing

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username MPGuy2824 and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I've asked for a discussion about the redirect IRAS 13349+1428, created by you. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 20 § IRAS 13349+1428.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|MPGuy2824}}. And don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

-MPGuy2824 (talk) 08:59, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussion about PKS 0451-28

Hello, Galaxybeing

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username MPGuy2824 and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I've asked for a discussion about the redirect PKS 0451-28, created by you. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 22 § PKS 0451-28.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|MPGuy2824}}. And don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

-MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:10, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussion about QSO J0100-2708

Hello, Galaxybeing

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username MPGuy2824 and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I've asked for a discussion about the redirect QSO J0100-2708, created by you. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 22 § QSO J0100-2708.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|MPGuy2824}}. And don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

-MPGuy2824 (talk) 11:10, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion for your infoboxes

Hi there, good work on the galaxy articles. I have just a small suggestion - whenever you add a {{Infobox galaxy}}, it's good to add inline citations to all of the parameters (e.g. right ascension, declination, distance, etc.) This helps anyone looking to verify these parameters. Loooke (talk) 06:38, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks dude for the feedback. Galaxybeing (talk) 04:33, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please leave an accurate edit summary

Hello, I'm Cameron Dewe. I noticed that you recently made an edit to Talk:Murder of Becky O'Connell in which your edit summary did not appear to describe the change you made. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Cameron Dewe (talk) 17:17, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, thanks for the feedback. Will apply proper edit summaries for now on. Galaxybeing (talk) 23:54, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion discussion about PKS 1402-012

Hello, Galaxybeing

Welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the username MPGuy2824 and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I've asked for a discussion about the redirect PKS 1402-012, created by you. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 4 § PKS 1402-012.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|MPGuy2824}}. And don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

-MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:41, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		Thank you for your numerous new articles on astronomical objects. Despite the fact that some editors have been giving you a hard time, overall your efforts are still greatly appreciated. Please keep up the good work. IcyDwarves (talk) 17:41, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. You can try editing other Wikipedias or Wikidata too! IcyDwarves (talk) 17:41, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]