Talk:Messier 60

Does anybody know how to prevent the picture from covering part of the text? This problem persists in a number of other Messier object articles I have been working on --Kalsermar 16:09, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

Moved ro Arp 116

I moved M60 to Arp 116. My reason is because since M60 has very little info and NGC 4647 has no artical, they should be put into one artical. This is only because they share the same information. Since thay are Arp objects, I've named the artical that the two galaxies share together. — HurricaneDevon @ 03:03, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

I made a mistake. See below. — HurricaneDevon @ 03:18, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Large black hole at center of NGC 4649

NGC 4649 is now one of only a handful of galaxies for which the mass of a supermassive black hole has been measured with two different methods. In addition, this new X-ray technique confirms that the supermassive black hole in NGC 4649 is one of the largest in the local universe with a mass about 3.4 billion times that of the Sun, about a thousand times bigger than the black hole at the center of our galaxy.

ScienceDaily (July 17, 2008) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lgroner (talk • contribs) 07:47, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Requested move (closed)

Arp 116 → Messier 60 : propor name for galaxy : — HurricaneDevon @ 03:18, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Survey and discussion

• Support: most common name used. — HurricaneDevon @ 03:18, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
• RENAME BUT it should be M60 or NGC 4649. but Messier 6o is not the proper name for the galaxy. NGC or Messier number should be the preferred name though. 132.205.45.148

• Technecly, it is being named the Messier number!!! — HurricaneDevon @ 17:23, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

• It does not have a proper name. You refer to it commonly with the Messier or New General Catalogue numbers. However, Messier objects are usually referred to with just the M and not "Messier Object 31" or "Messier 31" (M31 is the Andromeda Galaxy for people who don't know). Personally, I'd prefer using the NGC number as it avoids the different practices of calling this "Messier 60", "Messier Object 60", or "M60". 132.205.45.148 17:35, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
• If you can come up with an IAU rule stating that the "real name" is the Messier number, I'd be interested to see it. 132.205.45.148 17:36, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

• Move but not to Messier 60 but to Elliptical Galaxy M60 (that is now a redirect) where it happily was just like all the other ones that are named type-of-galaxy Messier XX. This one should just have been left alone in the first place and there should be a clear naming convention for these types of articles. Whoever wants to change M60 into Arp 116 doesn't know general (popular) astronomy.--Kalsermar 18:24, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Theres a new rule going around that astronomical object artical titles are not to have what the object is then it's name. And since M60 is already taken, Messier 60 is the whole name.[1] — HurricaneDevon @ 20:33, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

I still think NGC 4649 is a better title. It avoids the messy Messier names we've gotten in Wikipedia. 132.205.44.134 21:37, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Moved to NGC 4649. —Nightstallion (?) ^{Seen this already?} 06:54, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Could an admin rename this article to reflect the M designation in the title as per all other M objects that have no proper name like Crab Nebula and the like. Currently this is the only Messier object with an NGC number as title. I have tried renaming it but the titles it was known by before already exist like Messier 60.--Kalsermar 14:28, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

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

The result of the debate was Move. Although no discussion was done here, this move was supported at Talk:Messier 2. —Wknight94 (talk) 13:29, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Requested move

NGC 4649 → Messier 60 – Listing for User:WilliamKF who requested with comment, "Consistent naming with other Messier objects." —Wknight94 (talk) 03:43, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Survey

Add "* Support" or "* Oppose" followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~

Discussion

Add any additional comments

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.

File:Messier 60 Hubble WikiSky.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Messier 60 Hubble WikiSky.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do? Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 14:14, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Messier 60. 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/20110722021545/http://blackholes.stardate.org/directory/factsheet.php?p=M60 to http://blackholes.stardate.org/directory/factsheet.php?p=M60

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) 15:00, 20 December 2017 (UTC)