Talk:Caelum Supercluster
 | This article was nominated for deletion on 9 January 2023. The result of the discussion was redirect. |
| This page was proposed for deletion by SkyFlubbler (talk · contribs) on 4 January 2023. |
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
.jpg){kind=small}
Where does this size came from? edit
Seriously, there are nearly no sources I can find that tells anything about Caelum Supercluster's size. This 910 million ly figure is most likely spurious. The only source I could find is a single paper describing its cluster components, and even the Atlas of the Universe map states that only a single cluster of Caelum SCl has a redshift.
Can somebody make a review of this? Thanks! SkyFlubbler (talk) 08:41, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
And here is the only source I can find that tells anything about the Caelum SCl: https://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0012536
Which tells:
""The Caelum supercluster candidate (SCL 59c) borders the same void as the Fornax–Eridanus supercluster and is seen in Figure 3 by Tully et al. (1992) as a density en- hancement. However, a word of caution is needed: only two of the 11 members of this supercluster have measured redshifts.""
Not having established redshift values for a large portion of iys cluster members is for me already considered to be spurious. While I may agree that there might be a notably rich supercluster somewhere in that area, by just the simple fact that it has no sizes given at all, I think this article should be deleted for the meantime. SkyFlubbler (talk) 08:49, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
- Regardless of the size, I'm not convinced this meets WP:NASTRO. The only non-trivial coverage I could find is by Einasto, the original discoverer. SIMBAD. Tagging for notability. Modest Genius talk 12:49, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
SkyFlubbler: please just do a regular deletion request for this: the person who removed the tag didn't offer any good reason why they removed it. - Parejkoj (talk) 22:43, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
- @Parejkoj thanks for tagging. I am also confused as to his reason about chemical elements. Will do a regular deletion request, though. SkyFlubbler (talk) 02:39, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
- I think the one who removed the PROD might be a sockpuppet or some sort. Looking at his contributions it seems that he was going after PRODs and making some sort of fallacious reasons to deny their deletions. I think I've seen a previous blocked user who also does this pattern of behavior. SkyFlubbler (talk) 02:52, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
- Left a reply about in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Caelum Supercluster about where this size likely came from. ZaperaWiki44(✉/Contribs) 17:12, 10 January 2023 (UTC)