Talk:Gamma Microscopii
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
.jpg){kind=small}
External links modified[edit]
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Gamma Microscopii. 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 http://www.webcitation.org/6630AbtJZ?url=http%3A%2F%2Foutreach.atnf.csiro.au%2Feducation%2Fsenior%2Fastrophysics%2Fphotometry_colour.html to http://outreach.atnf.csiro.au/education/senior/astrophysics/photometry_colour.html
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: 18 January 2022).
- 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) 16:56, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
Nearest approach[edit]
Why is the visual magnitude given for the uninteresting distance of 6ly, but not for the very interesting closest distance of 1.14ly? Fig (talk) 19:26, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
- I presume it is because the distance (and therefore visual magnitude) at closest approach is highly uncertain - the 1.14ly figure appears to be one end of the error bar. I infer that the intent of the paragraph is to communicate that it shone in Earth's sky at a visual magnitude of -3.0 or brighter for 200000 years and that, at its closest, it reached between about 0.8 and 3.3 magnitudes brighter than that. The former would leave it slightly inferior to Venus at the latter's brightest, the latter would make it truly spectacular: even a casual observer would notice it in the daylight sky in favorable conditions. 213.78.82.8 (talk) 20:05, 4 June 2021 (UTC)