Talk:WOH S264
This article was nominated for deletion on 27 June 2023. The result of the discussion was draftify. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:52, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
Name of the article[edit]
Is this star referred to as WOH S264 in any source? Both SIMBAD and recent papers use W60 B90, why is the WOH designation selected as the main one? VY Canis Majoris (talk) 22:17, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah, W60 B90 seems to be the more recognizable and popular designation. The Space Enthusiast (talk) 22:22, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
- That’s what I was thinking. SpaceImplorerExplorerImplorer 08:16, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
- I think that WOH S264 should be the current title. It is much more readable and beautiful than [W60] B90. InTheAstronomy32 (talk) 13:52, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
- See WP:UCRN. Just because WOH S264 is more readable and more pleasant sounding doesn't mean it should be the title. SpaceImplorerExplorerImplorer 13:55, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
- But that name will still have problems with Wikipedia, which doesn't support square brackets ("[") in titles. Therefore, "WOH S264" is the most appropriate name anyway, is commonly recognizable and at least it can be pronounced easily without having to spell out the letters. InTheAstronomy32 (talk) 14:33, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
- The just call it W60 B90 instead since that is basically the same name. Also, in my opinion it is easier to say W60 B90 than WOH S264. SpaceImplorerExplorerImplorer 14:40, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
- But that name will still have problems with Wikipedia, which doesn't support square brackets ("[") in titles. Therefore, "WOH S264" is the most appropriate name anyway, is commonly recognizable and at least it can be pronounced easily without having to spell out the letters. InTheAstronomy32 (talk) 14:33, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
- See WP:UCRN. Just because WOH S264 is more readable and more pleasant sounding doesn't mean it should be the title. SpaceImplorerExplorerImplorer 13:55, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
Requested move 29 May 2024[edit]
It has been proposed in this section that WOH S264 be renamed and moved to W60 B90. A bot will list this discussion on requested moves' current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil. Please use {{subst:requested move}} . Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly. |
WOH S264 → W60 B90 – [W60] B90 is a name that has been used way more in literature than WOH S264. SpaceImplorerExplorerImplorer 07:00, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
- Support, because it is the commonly-used name for this star. InTheAstronomy32 (talk) 16:49, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
- Start-Class AfC articles
- AfC submissions by date/16 April 2024
- Accepted AfC submissions
- Start-Class Astronomy articles
- Low-importance Astronomy articles
- Start-Class Astronomy articles of Low-importance
- Start-Class Astronomical objects articles
- Pages within the scope of WikiProject Astronomical objects (WP Astronomy Banner)
- Requested moves