Talk:Virgo Supercluster

The following information passed a request for deletion.

This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.

---

Virgo Supercluster

Doesn't meet WT:CFI#Place names.​—msh210℠ (talk) 07:31, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Um, I think it does. Either way, this isn't a "geographic entity" in the first place. (Though this could be made a lot simpler if someone would just add a translation...) --Yair rand (talk) 07:34, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

IP 65.94.44.51 has added two translations. --Yair rand (talk) 08:05, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Virgo-Superhaufen Mutante 11:45, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Delete encyclopedic content per WT:NOT. DCDuring TALK 11:49, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

What part of the entry is encyclopedic? Is Milky Way also encyclopedic? --Yair rand (talk) 12:15, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Speaking of which, there should really only be one definition for Milky Way. Keep Virgo Supercluster by fixing the entry or amending CFI. DAVilla 16:02, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Why would Milky Way only have one definition? There are clearly two distinct definitions used in astronomy. They are not equivalent, and refer to two different things, a galaxy, an a visual phenomenon of the night sky. (though the galaxy is more properly called "Milky Way Galaxy", but it is shortened to "Milky Way" frequently) The concept of the galaxy definition did not exist until recently (last 150 years), before then, the concept of galaxies did not exist. 65.94.45.209 05:19, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Strong keep. --Yair rand (talk) 12:15, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Now it does meet the CFI. Keep but improve the definition: it's terribly POV.​—msh210℠ (talk) 17:31, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Kept but could still use cleanup as noted. DAVilla 21:35, 30 December 2010 (UTC)