PNSMurthy

St2-18

Hello!

Hi, Would you like to help me with the article on Stephenson 2-18? BTW do you have a Youtube channel?--THE COLOSSAL GALAXY NAMED IC1101 (talk) 07:18, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi? Oh.... its you :)

Sure, I can help you. I do not have a youtube channel @THE COLOSSAL GALAXY NAMED IC1101:.PNSMurthy (talk) 07:53, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks!

I replaced your article with the WP article. Work on simplifying that.PNSMurthy (talk) 08:00, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

BTW< Negueruela et al 2013 "The population of M-type RSG's in the starburst Cluster Stephenson 2" said that St2-18 (Mentioned as D1 of DFK 1) is M6 or maybe M6.5. (See figure 1) What temperature is that? It certainly is a Late type Red Supergiant.

Roughly 2900 (<2900). Do you have a discord account?PNSMurthy (talk) 08:09, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

I don't have discord. Cooler than Expected. Maybe 3,100 K? If then St2 -18 may be bigger, This is exciting !

No. M5 is 2,950 already.PNSMurthy (talk) 08:17, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

0-0 Btw Exploring The mass loss history rates of red supergiants (New reference) says Stephenson 2-18 (Mentioned as RSGC1-01; This is a typo as They were talking about Stephenson 2 ) Is 630,000 times the solar luminosity ! See page 18 of that paper and Please tell this to Wikipedia editors.

Link the ref please - never mind, I know the refPNSMurthy (talk) 08:39, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

BTW you should have not put parentheses and put the M6 Spectral Type

Ah yes, but it mentions it as a foreground star.PNSMurthy (talk) 08:46, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

No I don't think so, I am sure because of its Higher extinction It is slightly more distant, If then It could be that we could drop the 90,000 solar luminosity and just mention it in the paragraph.

Admit it, St2-18 is unreasonably luminous. Similar to WOH G17 & RS Mensae...PNSMurthy (talk) 08:51, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

I am sure It is below the limit. Remmber the RSG luminosity limit is 660,000 lsol? Also, Does Higher Extinction mean a foreground object? Davies et al says it is NOT A foreground object. St2-18 is mysterious. Higher Extinction but Foreground Object? That is contradiction...

Might be, high extinction levels don't necessarily mean its an SG object. It might be a foreground RSG?PNSMurthy (talk) 09:01, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

I think it is just Slightly in front of the cluster. you may remove the section on List of largest stars...

Everyone must consent. I cannot decide its just slightly nearer.09:04, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Pls do the discussion on User Talk: Lithopsian as I don't want it to be Inadvertently downgraded, as if it was, the largest star would be The one with a long name.... And that name is annoying...

Lithopsian LOL? He isn't a god, you know? I'm leaving the section where it is for wider visibility.PNSMurthy (talk) 09:11, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Also, That ref ... well it does not say it is a Foreground Star !

It does. Read the text. It discusses it indirectly, implying St2-18 is an FG object.PNSMurthy (talk) 09:11, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

By the way, please sign your talk!

It just means its member ship is Doubtful. It might be just not in the cluster but Somewhat near to it.

I ship it being an FG, but, whatever you say. Please use proper grammar!PNSMurthy (talk) 09:16, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Ok, as you wish. Maybe your claim will get refuted?

Maybe, idk. I really don't know why you like St2-18 lol.PNSMurthy (talk) 09:19, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

LOL, I wish i does not get demoted. Tell this to the editors Hopefully the claim that it is a FG Object is wrong as I have 2 points. 1, It has higher extinction than the other star cluster members ad 2, Davies et al says it is unlikely to be a foreground Giant.

Though I have absolutely no idea what the above discussion is about, I want to note that decisions as to the various classifications of objects are to be from sources, not one's own research simplu with the help of sources. If the available sources say it's likely to be something, the article should reflect that, not stating it being something as fact. Vermont (talk) 14:13, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

@Vermont: I appreciate your helpful opinion :) Indeed, we are going by that. Me and the other user are merely discussing facts about a certain astronomical object. We are not planning to implement anything :)PNSMurthy (talk) 22:59, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Well, there is vandalism on the Wikipedia article of HD 100546, saying that HD 100546 b is artificially created and had no movement... Pls remove it.

 DonePNSMurthy (talk) 03:28, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

There is still more Vandalism, The Part where it mentioned HD 100546 B became more diffuse is Vandalism until the Part where it mentioned that it is Between the Size of A large Planet and A brown Dwarf. BTW, I think those 2 stars above St2-18 should be removed, And St2-18 is not a FG Object But Not Related to Stephenson 2. Also, I saw your post, Davies Et Al said that ST2-18 is Not A FG Object. I am sure that They are Saying that it is Unrelated to the Cluster. This is the Note that we will put. Pls tell What I have Said To the Wikipedian Editors

Okay....maybePNSMurthy (talk) 05:28, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

BTW, what is the brightness of St2-18 At Various Bands in The Infrared??? Like, Near Infrared, Mid-Infrared and Far Infrared?

Haven't bothered to check. Might later.PNSMurthy (talk) 06:15, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

BTW Would you Put WOH G64 at 1,540 Solar radii because The 1,090-1,895 Solar radii are Inaccurate. Last Night I even saw Nussun 05 Change too many sizes, and for me she is making the Liston mainstream Wikipedia a can of Worms and making it Inaccurate Such it is nothing...

Also, Remove that 2,300 solar radii star as it is potentially misleading and say on the talk page that Stephenson 2-18 is not a FG Star but possibly unrelated to Stephenson 2, not only that but also a new section about Nussun 05 adding misleading sizes and what do we do ... Pls put those on the talk page and you should say that I said it and also say that I thank Lithopsian so much for adding the 630,000 solar luminosities value and M6 spectral type to Stephenson 2-18.

@THE COLOSSAL GALAXY NAMED IC1101: I'd suggest not telling other editors what to do. If you think an edit should be made, make it yourself. Operator873^talkconnect 17:04, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

@Operator873:The Collosal Galaxy Named IC 1101 is currently blocked from mainstream Wikipedia for a temporary length of time.

@THE COLOSSAL GALAXY NAMED IC1101: Who said its inaccurate? Everything you said is strictly you opinion. Nussun 05 isn't misleading anyone. All she's doing is cataloging the newest estimates. I have no qualms with the new largest star, though potentially have one with VX Sagitarii & W Hydra.PNSMurthy (talk) 23:24, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

OK, if then what are the luminosity and temperature of that star and Please ask Lithopsian. THE COLOSSAL GALAXY NAMED IC1101 (talk) 03:37, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Also, is V1439 Sagittarii the New Largest star, or is it inaccurate? also, shall we bring St2-18 to 2,583 Solar radii? THE COLOSSAL GALAXY NAMED IC1101 (talk) 03:46, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Don't cross WP:Synthesis. Temperature from one source and luminosity from another. I don't know if the new largest star's size is inaccurate. I haven't bothered to check. I'm also not sure if it has faulty Gaia Dr2 parallax. And, for the second time, Lithopsian is not a god! Not every star larger than St2-18 is inaccurate. Hell, St2-18 itself might be inaccurate. Don't claim inaccuracy when there might be none. Plus, I am not aware of a lower size for the new largest star.PNSMurthy (talk) 06:18, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

I don't think St2-18 is inaccurate, although its properties will change. What About NML Cyg? I think the 1,183 solar radii is dubious... I will make a List of Doubtful Sizes. --THE COLOSSAL GALAXY NAMED IC1101 (talk) 06:53, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

I have found out Something, V1943 Sagittarii is based on Faulty Gaia DR2 data, as the reference for its size is "Stellar and substellar companions of nearby stars from Gaia Dr2. Binarity from proper motion anomaly."

You cannot base inaccuracy on the fact that its size is from Gaia Dr2. I see no signs of inaccuracy yet...PNSMurthy (talk) 09:25, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Discuss it on the talk page of List of largest stars and Mention that It is my opinion it is inaccurate.--THE COLOSSAL GALAXY NAMED IC1101 (talk) 10:18, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

I am not discussing anything without conclusive proof. And, for the final time, that is your opinion. Cite sources.PNSMurthy (talk) 02:59, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Just Discuss it, It is possibly misleading People and It would be pretty hard to convince them that it is inaccurate. --THE COLOSSAL GALAXY NAMED IC1101 (talk) 04:42, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

I WILL NOT discuss it, unless, you cite damn sources!PNSMurthy (talk) 09:37, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Ok, Your reply terrified me... well why do you think the 1,788 solar radii for WOH G64 is one degree off? and also please create a youtube channel because there is this guy who claims VY Canis Majoris is 2,000 solar radii.

Don't be terrified :)Not the 1788 one, another estimate, but that doesn't matter. Who am I to question scientists? And, I don't want to create a youtube channel. Why would I? I don't care about guys who mislead people. And, no one takes youtube seriously anyway.PNSMurthy (talk) 10:32, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Ok. I will never mind the Youtuber. Don't know about V1943 Sag, it could possibly mislead people... well let's wait until The other guys figure that star out... V255 Canis majoris said that if that size is accurate, St2-18 won't be the largest star anymore... Nussun 05 replied but I want to see the other guy's replies. if then V1943 Sag might be Inaccurate... Unfortunately I can't ask them since I am blocked... When I get unblocked, Please help me on The other Stephenson 2 Star articles and I have found a paper that says IC 1101's core is larger than that of any Galaxy...--THE COLOSSAL GALAXY NAMED IC1101 (talk) 10:40, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

I seePNSMurthy (talk) 11:09, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

What do you mean? BTW V1943 Sag is based on a ‘’WILDLY’’ Unreliable parallax which is a state,ent added by Lithopsian so Stephenson 2-18 is still the largest ! I am so happy now Yeah !!!

Respond THE COLOSSAL GALAXY NAMED IC1101 (talk) 14:04, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Please don't expect me to respond at 12:00 in the night. What source refs IC 1101 as the largest galaxy? PNSMurthy (talk) 00:41, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

I don’t know how to link sources... shall we discuss about stars that could be 2,000+ solar radii?

Simply copy paste the link. Or share the name of the paper. Sure.PNSMurthy (talk) 09:40, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

I am going to Talk about MY Cephei, possible AGB Star or A possible Rival to St2-18. Also, I want to Talk about how Stephenson 2-18 is not 1,630 Solar radii as claimed on the Sam Halls Post.--THE COLOSSAL GALAXY NAMED IC1101 (talk) 06:14, 24 August 2020 (UTC) Also, Ask Lithopsian if he is an astronomer, and tell him about the spectral energy distribution.--THE COLOSSAL GALAXY NAMED IC1101 (talk) 10:18, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

1.) What do you want to talk about those stars. 2.) He probably knows already. I'm an astronomer, and I know, so I think he knows too.PNSMurthy (talk) 23:05, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

What do you mean? Also are you an astronomer??? And apparently you stop editing at 6 pm your time... also I am from the Philippines, like Johndric Valdez.

I really don't care about my editing habits. I mean that, I'm assuming he knows about SED. Please don't reveal personal information - about yourself or anyone else.PNSMurthy (talk) 04:33, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

I am talking about the Spectral energy Distribution of St2-18. I think if it is still bright in the Far Infared it has a dust disk. I don't think it is that bright in the Far Infared and It is very faint in the far Infared.--THE COLOSSAL GALAXY NAMED IC1101 (talk) 05:45, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Also, i think The other stars in Stephenson 2 Should have articles, As one Is probably A YHG, another With a spectral type with M7 and more. I also want to point out that IC 1101 has possibly the Largest core of any Galaxy.--THE COLOSSAL GALAXY NAMED IC1101 (talk) 14:45, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Sure, but watch for WP:NOTABILITYPNSMurthy (talk) 23:09, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Ok, But is Stephenson 2-18 bright or faint in the far infared?

idk. ProbablyPNSMurthy (talk) 05:26, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Idk as well. Taking note of the 90,000 Lsol estimate, based on 12 micrometer and 25 micrometer long wavelengths, I don't don't think it is that bright in the Far infrared such that it is somewhat dimmer than the other Cluster members, But DFK 49 is bright in Mid Infrared. Also, I think most of St2-18's luminosity comes from Near Infared. --THE COLOSSAL GALAXY NAMED IC1101 (talk) 06:56, 28 August 2020 (UTC) I just did some research into The comments of the Videos that say Stephenson 2-18 is the largest stars and unfortunately, I found comments saying that V1943 Sagittari is the largest. That is what i was telling you :/ --THE COLOSSAL GALAXY NAMED IC1101 (talk) 12:21, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

LOL.PNSMurthy (talk) 23:15, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

What do you mean -_-

Also, I have found a video that says Stephenson 2-18 is just 474 radii... It is in Russian, Search “Stephenson 2-18” on Youtube and you will see the vid. try to debunk it.

1.) I am not Russian

2.) Only some 100 million people are Russian.

3.) So, at most, only some 100 million will see that video.PNSMurthy (talk) 04:13, 31 August 2020 (UTC) -_-, I think it will cause Russians to attack people Believing St2-18 is the largest star :/ also, the narrator saying that St2-18 is 474 Rsun does not know that It is actually St2-DFK 18 and St2-18 is St2-DFK 1. The naming for the stars is getting on my Nerves !--THE COLOSSAL GALAXY NAMED IC1101 (talk) 04:26, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

BTW, Help me calculate the Sizes of the other RSGC2 Stars. When I get unblocked on Mainstream Wikipedia, I will add them.--THE COLOSSAL GALAXY NAMED IC1101 (talk) 04:23, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

I already know their sizes.PNSMurthy (talk) 04:57, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Again, WP:NOTABILITY, you cannot make articles for those stars. They are not notable.PNSMurthy (talk) 04:58, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

I mean the sizes from Exploring the Mass-Loss history rates of Red Supergiants.--THE COLOSSAL GALAXY NAMED IC1101 (talk) 06:24, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

ohPNSMurthy (talk) 07:33, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

???--THE COLOSSAL GALAXY NAMED IC1101 (talk) 08:11, 3 September 2020 (UTC) BTW is St2-18’s temperature consistent with its spectral type???

Yes.PNSMurthy (talk) 03:23, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

How so???? Respond

List of largest galaxies

Hello, on List of largest galaxies, why did you tag it to be deleted? Thanks Naddruf (talk) 04:43, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

@Naddruf: It has been deleted on mainstream WP because it is 1.) unreliable, 2.) impossible to perfect. References disagree on literally everything. For more info, search the list on mainstream PNSMurthy (talk) 05:22, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Okay. Thanks for telling me. Naddruf (talk) 06:10, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

>:(

I noticed that Nussun05 has reverted to older estimates for these stars: Italicized Stars are those who have been reverted to newer estimates. Those stars who are not are those who have not been reverted to newer estimates.

• 1. NML Cygni
• 2. WOH G64
• 3. WOH S71
• 4. Stephenson 2-18
• 5. MY Cephei
• 6. WY Velorum

Really? I'll see what I can do.PNSMurthy (talk) 10:04, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

I don't see anything that's wrong. It all seems (relatively) accurate.PNSMurthy (talk) 10:05, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

They are all older than previously depicted values :/

Even so, they are accurate. And, most of the values for stars, whether old or brand new, are similar. Nothing to fear. And, I don't see the old values for your final three contenders on your list.PNSMurthy (talk) 00:49, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Ok, what temperature is M6? also, which estimate of St2-18’s luminosity is more accurate? 90 K Lsol or 440k lsol or 630k lsol Also in Nussun05 sandbox, when you see the oldest revision, there is Stephenson 2 DFK 1, then it is followed by dubious-discuss. On the old Quora answer, it says Stephenson 2 DFK 1 is disputed. But the claims that St2- DFK 1 are for me silly imagination, as the 2,150 Rsol is based on SED, which is getting reliable. PNSMurthy?

Yes? The temperature that represents M6 is just below 3,000* K. Don't look at Quora. Nussun05's sandbox originally got the value for St2-18 from Sam Halls' post on Quora. St2-18, at least for now, is not disputed.PNSMurthy (talk) 02:53, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

And, why the hell are you looking at someone else's testing place? You have no right to be snooping in their.PNSMurthy (talk) 02:55, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Oh, just looking. BTW,based on Gaia data, what is the size of VY Cma? I wish Stephenson 2-18 will not get disputed as people seem to agree it is not a member of St2 but they say it is a late type star, and is a luminous object in the infared.

I am not sure. I am not a big fan of Gaia Dr2, and thus, rarely use or look at it. Why don't you check on Vizier or Simbad. I am pretty sure they don't list a value for VY CMa's solar radii (at least they don't list a value in accordance with Gaia).PNSMurthy (talk) 02:19, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Sam Halls calculated 2,110 (!) Solar radii. Note that I am not editing frequently, I have online classes.

Where did you he get that value? Also, I really don't care about what Sam Halls says. Online classes? Okay...I don't really mind kiddo.PNSMurthy (talk) 03:39, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

I saw that likely Dubious value on Quora, also, why dont look at Quora ?

Like I said, its not the most accurate place in the world. You don't have to not look at Quora, but, just don't take it for face value, Quora is heavily unreliable - and Sam Halls is just the tip of the iceberg. But, then again, Sam Halls does give a reference list - at least I think he does, I haven't seen his post in a while. If you're so interested in Sam Halls, why don't you check his reflist and see where he gets the sources for the radii he documents?PNSMurthy (talk) 00:20, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Well, at this point there is no hope of VY Canis Majoris being 2,000 solar radii or more.

Agreed.PNSMurthy (talk) 04:05, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Wdym?

Respond Nussun 05 once again added an inaccurate size of UU Aurigae, So I checked the ref. I saw V1943 Sagitarri, and the Luminosity and Temperature are 2,712K and 5812 Solar Luminosity, which leads to a petty 340 or so solar radii. Tell this to every one at mainstream Wikipedia, and use it as a proof that Nussun 05 is dead wrong. --THE COLOSSAL GALAXY NAMED IC1101 (talk) 23:23, 16 September 2020 (UTC) Why are you not responding? are you busy?--THE COLOSSAL GALAXY NAMED IC1101 (talk) 23:23, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Yes, please don't bombard me with comments for a while :/PNSMurthy (talk) 23:25, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Ok...Pls reply to the fact that V1943 Sag is only 343 Solar radii... Check the version where UU Aurigae is the largest star, then click the ref after that scroll down and check the entire reference, after you found it tell everyone.--THE COLOSSAL GALAXY NAMED IC1101 (talk) 08:04, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

BTW, at which distance you assume St2-18 to be at? 18,000 Ly,15,000 Ly or 10,000 Ly? Do you still ship it being an FG?

I don't ship anything as of now. I haven't managed to sniff out anymore papers - so I don't have information on that front. I can't just assume things. I currently consider it a possible FG - nothing more than that. This is just my opinion though. I prefer to go with the scientific papers' flow when there's nothing else to go on.PNSMurthy (talk) 00:47, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Me, well I consider it as being a possible member of Stephenson 2 at 5.5 kpc (18,000 Ly). Given the most recent Lum. Estimate, I think its properties will be relatively unchanged. Btw, IC 1101's article was updated by me yesterday to include a statement which says it has the largest core of any galaxy.

Sure, as long as your opinions are not in articles, I don't mind. But...the debate about IC 1101 is still out.PNSMurthy (talk) 23:54, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

What do you mean? Say this as I want to see their reactions, IC 1101 might not be the largest (Maybe it is the largest), But it has the largest core of any galaxy.

What reactions? I don't get you.PNSMurthy (talk) 07:48, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

The editors' reactions. BTW are you mad at Mr. Philip massey ad his collaborators because they gave VY CMA Only 600 solar radii? --THE COLOSSAL GALAXY NAMED IC1101 (talk) 09:37, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

No.PNSMurthy (talk) 11:20, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

BTW I think the refs that say that St2-18 is a foreground star were not listening to Davies 2007. Pls say this to Lithopsian.

That is purely your opinion. Why should one listen to Davies et al 2007? It should be the other way around - since the paper that suggests St2-18 is an FG is more recent.

Well, if it is an FG, what could explain the higher extinction? Maybe dust ? also, Davies et al said that the radial velocity might be offset by an envelope. Also, Negueruela 2012 says its radial velocity might make it a cluster member. What does a field RSG Mean?

It could be an FG RSG with high levels of dust extinction. An FG star doesn't always have to be a different type of star. I also don't care about Davies and Negueruela et al - since Humphreys et al 2020 is more recent. Also, a 'field RSG' makes no sense. You must mean a 'same-field' RSG. That simply means it is in line/at the same distance with whatever astronomers want to observe.PNSMurthy (talk) 04:19, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Well Humphreys et al says its membership is doubtful. I am sad that R136a1 is no longer the most massive...

It seems all the record holders we knew and love are being replaced. You just have to live with it.PNSMurthy (talk) 06:29, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Ok, At least St2-18 is still the largest star :) If a star/nebula/galaxy gets demoted, I will accept it If an equally extreme object replaces it. I don't know why St2-18 had a higher lum than before, 440,000 then 630,000? Then Humpherys et al says that it is similar to D2, At a spec type of M6 or M7, and then it also says that it might be more luminous than 630,000 Solar luminosity, so I was so happy to see that. I wonder why it has difference despite oth using SED...--THE COLOSSAL GALAXY NAMED IC1101 (talk) 03:36, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Look, estimates change, whether for the better or worse. 440,000 - 630,000 in Lbol is a relatively meagre change. And, this is made up for in the possible temperature they imply (M6), since M6 is hotter than the M7 stated in older papers.PNSMurthy (talk) 01:41, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

How to convert from logTeff to Teff?

The same way in which you convert logL to Lbol. - Bacically, you do keep the logTeff as an index for 10. Calculate this - and you get the true Teff.PNSMurthy (talk) 03:10, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Please link the article giving logTeff.PNSMurthy (talk) 03:16, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you so much. I thought logTeff 3.5 meant 3,500 Kelvin, it actually meant 3,162 Kelvin, my personal opinion on Stepehnson 2-18's temperature...--THE COLOSSAL GALAXY NAMED IC1101 (talk) 03:30, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

I see. Again, link the paper!PNSMurthy (talk) 00:36, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Well I examined the 1708 solar radii UY Sct paper. You apparently downgraded MY Cephei, that is not the most recent ref

So what? NML Cygni doesn't have the most recent ref. Does it? Neither does Betelgeuse.PNSMurthy (talk) 00:57, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Looks like a discussion is on. Also, if a smaller lum estimate is for St2-18, note: it might be a different star ! It looks like Stephenson 2-18 is the only star likely bigger than Saturn's orbit... :/ Should we follow most recent estimates for all the stars like NML Cygni, MY Cephei and more?

UY Scuti

I saw Nussun05 add very old radii values of UY Scuti, from 1988. What do we do? Help ! W60 B-90 is on top again ! I am Overreacting, but that radius is raw and uses values that are not accepted.

One, the 1988 estimate is not being used (Arroyo-Torres is), whilst W60-B90 is not at the top (anymore).PNSMurthy (talk) 23:19, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

What about Stephenson 2-18’s new parallax ?

Huh? What new parallax? Please explain.PNSMurthy (talk) 06:34, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

The new early data release from Gaia

I'll check it out.PNSMurthy (talk) 02:21, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Some one has confused Stephenson 2-18 with stephenson 2 dfk 18 ! on the stephenson 2 page, there are two links to stephenson 2-18 .— Preceding unsigned comment added by THE COLOSSAL GALAXY NAMED IC1101 (talk • contribs) 11:02, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

Hmmm I'll look into it.PNSMurthy (talk) 22:47, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

Ok, It is the Stephenson 2 page, Stephenson 2-DFK 18 (known as 18) has been mistakenly linked into the Stephenson 2-18's page.— Preceding unsigned comment added by THE COLOSSAL GALAXY NAMED IC1101 (talk • contribs) 00:16, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

The user White Hot 8.0

This user must be blocked. He is requesting people to re-add the inaccurate estimate of VY Canis Majoris and other inaccurately sized stars like WY Velorum, V1943 Sagittarri, UU Aurigae and more. and also saying about stars larger than around 9,000 solar radii. he also requests a star he made (AFP 489) To be added on the list with 9,770 solar radii. Pls, report this.

Sure, I'll check the new talk page additions out.PNSMurthy (talk) 10:18, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. The user has been blocked.

Yep.PNSMurthy (talk) 01:03, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Happy New Year, PNSMurthy.--THE COLOSSAL GALAXY NAMED IC1101 (talk) 04:48, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Happy new year to you too!PNSMurthy (talk) 06:20, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

D--THE COLOSSAL GALAXY NAMED IC1101 (talk) 08:23, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi, But VY CMa is 3,000 RSun again...

Oof.PNSMurthy (talk) 01:05, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

CorrectedPNSMurthy (talk) 01:08, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, it is obviously inaccurate ! --THE COLOSSAL GALAXY NAMED IC1101 (talk) 02:21, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

TruePNSMurthy (talk) 03:32, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Appereantly, there is a star in andromeda that is larger than St2-18, but it is potentially dubious.

Sure.PNSMurthy (talk) 02:33, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

What do we do about it? IDK If this star should stay... are you busy!

Kinda. Please name the star and its radii, and where it is in the list (if it is in the list).PNSMurthy (talk) 03:49, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Its radius is somewhat unreasonable, at 2535 rsol. It is sitting on ST2-18.( I mean it is above St2-18) PNS Murthy? PNS Murthy pls check the ref of the possibly dubious star. thank you for bringing the discussion to the talk page of the list of largest stars, I am certaintly supicious of that 2MASS Star. Shall we remove it? PNS Murthy?

Hmmm. I'll see is we do need to remove it.PNSMurthy (talk) 01:19, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Okay. That definitely needs to be looked into.PNSMurthy (talk) 01:26, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you soo much ! I am concerning if someone has said it is the new larger star.

Okay.PNSMurthy (talk) 03:41, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

So may you help me create galaxy articles here?— Preceding unsigned comment added by THE COLOSSAL GALAXY NAMED IC1101 (talk • contribs) 01:08, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

If I have the time.PNSMurthy (talk) 04:58, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Delete Stephenson 2-18 from the list? Space Implorer Explorer wants to delete it because of uncertain distance.— Preceding unsigned comment added by THE COLOSSAL GALAXY NAMED IC1101 (talk • contribs) 22:51, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Oof rlly sorry for the late reply. I've already refuted that claim.PNSMurthy (talk) 10:07, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

BTW, pls help me organize Stephenson 2 on the English Wikipedia.— Preceding unsigned comment added by The Space Enthusiast (talk • contribs) 04:20, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

SurePNSMurthy (talk) 08:58, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia Talk: WikiProject Astronomy

I have a discussion on the indicated page about IC1101.— Preceding unsigned comment added by The Space Enthusiast (talk • contribs) 01:36, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

 Sorry for the late reply, I have been busy. I will check out the discussion.PNSMurthy (talk) 04:28, 22 June 2021 (UTC)