Talk:Gacrux

Requested move

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

The result of the debate was don't move. —Nightst a llion (?) ^{Seen this already?} 07:23, 5 April 2006 (UTC) Gamma Crucis → Gacrux – {it's the propor name — Hurricane Devon ( Talk ) 02:31, 31 March 2006 (UTC)} copied from the entry on the WP:RM page[reply]

Survey

Support: it's the propor name of the star. It's the only star with this name, and it's always used to identify this star an is a popular name (e.g. [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], & [7]). And F.Y.I., the artical still says it's called Gacrux
— Hurricane Devon ( Talk ) 02:38, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a name, it's an abbreviation. 132.205.45.110 20:38, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose: for all but the brightest stars (Arcturus, Vega, Regulus, etc) and a few other notable stars (Polaris, Algol, Mira) it is more common in English to use the Bayer designation for the star (other languages may do this differently, but that's what is generally used in English). For instance, when Delta Scorpii had a flareup in recent years, the Sky and Telescope (popular amateur astronomy magazine) article on it called it Delta Scorpii, not "Dschubba" [8] [9]. Apart from the fact that the traditional names are not the most common names, there a number of problems with traditional names:
- Often the spelling is not settled: there are numerous minor spelling variants (Almak == Almach == Alamach; Alrai == Errai; and dozens and dozens of other examples)
- Some stars have more than one entirely different traditional name (eg, Gemma == Alphecca, Alkaid == Benetnasch, Regor == Suhail, Phecda = Phad, etc.)
- For some stars, it is not clear exactly which star in the constellation has the given traditional name, eg Suhail in Vela could be Gamma or Lambda
- For some stars, stars in entirely different constellations can have the same traditional name (eg, Gienah in Corvus and Gienah in Cygnus)

For the above reasons, using traditional names as article titles (except for first-magnitude stars and a few other exceptional cases) is very problematic. I even came across a number of cases where duplicate articles had been created by different users at different traditional names (eg, Regor and Suhail. To resolve all these problems it is far better to use the Bayer designation, which is also the most commonly-used name in most cases. -- Curps 02:50, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OPPOSE - Gacrux is an abbreviated version of Gamma Crucis. 132.205.45.110 20:38, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Curps. Gene Nygaard 20:29, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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

the name Gacrux

Since there appears to be some controversy here, I thought I would throw in some background on this name. It is an invention, a coinage, which became popular only when it was adopted by the "American Nautical Almanac" when it was revised in 1953. Navigators used this name, not astronomers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.80.110.88 (talk) 01:47, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A good note that fits in the section Etymology, preferrably sourced. If you have a source, book name, authorm ISBN etc, it would be perfect. Rursus dixit. (^mbork³!) 09:53, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Binary star?

The article refers to Gacrux as a binary star, then goes on to explain that it's only an optical binary. A binary star is defined in Wikipedia as "a star system consisting of two stars orbiting around their common center of mass." This is not the case for Gacrux and the description as a binary should be removed. Paul Fisher (talk) 11:55, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Neutron emission from white dwarf companion?

Derrr? This uncited statement, as presently worded, is nonsense. However, it's possible what is meant is that the barium is the result of mass exchange with a white dwarf companion. I'll remove the statement completely Real Soon if no one can come up with a cite. Yaush (talk) 22:38, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Helium flash onset

Does anyone has information on how much time is estimated until Gamma Crucis becomes a horizontal branch star? According to its radius of 84 R☉, it has almost reached the tip of a red giant branch. --Artman40 (talk) 23:17, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Gamma Crucis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:54, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Gamma Crucis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110928143206/http://domeofthesky.com/clicks/gacrux.html to http://domeofthesky.com/clicks/gacrux.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:38, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

New Update

I have just made some new updates on this article. Updated info plus minor material with a cite. I have corrected several syntax or context errors, and rearranged the structure similar to the article on the Crux stars. Controversy mentioned above have been mostly solved with IAU star naming decree. Some new errors may have been accidental introduced and may need further corrections. Arianewiki1 (talk) 04:35, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Ginan (star) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 14:01, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]