Talk:Nu Caeli
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
.jpg){kind=small}
Name
[edit]As far as I can tell, the name "Nu Caeli" is either made up or has never been used in the last few decades. Ardric47 19:54, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
Source for the name?
[edit]Can anyone provide a source for the Nu designation? This and Lambda Caeli seem out of place. --Imzogelmo (talk) 22:38, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
- I agree, it doesn't seem to exist. The article should be renamed.—RJH (talk) 22:58, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
- Not so. Wikisky lists it at Nu Caeli (HD 30985).
http://server3.wikisky.org/starview?object_type=1&object_id=5632Benkenobi18 (talk) 20:08, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
The name "Nu Caeli" is attributed to Johann Elert Bode.[1] However, his designations are no longer in common use. It is probable that the reason 'Nu Caeli' even shows up in a web search is because of the Wikipedia article. Otherwise it appears to fail WP:RECOGNIZABLE. This would suggest a name change to the 'HD 30985' designation would be appropriate. Praemonitus (talk) 19:12, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
- Well, I made the logical move advised above, and it was reverted as "needs discussion". I guess this page doesn't count. I'll leave it up to local editors to work it out. Pinging: @RJHall: @Benkenobi18: @Imzogelmo: @Praemonitus:, Regards, GenQuest "scribble" 17:42, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
- Hah! Well, I'll have to admit that I didn't look at this talk page before reverting. I don't think there should be any dispute that ν Caeli is a valid designation. It's in Simbad, not renowned copying Wikipedia. HD 30985 is also a valid designation. If that's all agreed then we can decide which is the WP:COMMONNAME. Or something else? There is HR 1557. Lithopsian (talk) 19:12, 4 April 2021 (UTC)