Talk:Hipparcos

This  level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Spaceflight Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spaceflight, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of spaceflight on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpaceflightWikipedia:WikiProject SpaceflightTemplate:WikiProject Spaceflightspaceflight articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Astronomy High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.AstronomyWikipedia:WikiProject AstronomyTemplate:WikiProject AstronomyAstronomy articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Europe: ESA Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Europe, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to European topics of a cross-border nature on Wikipedia.EuropeWikipedia:WikiProject EuropeTemplate:WikiProject EuropeEurope articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by ESA task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Can anybody toldme what is "Type of orbit"? I understand that all orbits are elliptic... so?

Hello,

A update is needed: http://www.astronomy.com/asy/default.aspx?c=a&id=2496 Yann 21:39, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is an extensive update covering all aspects Archie carnforth (talk) 16:54, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pleiades_(star_cluster)#Distance says there was an anomaly in the measured distance to the Pleiades. This article not only doesn't seem to have more information on this...It doesn't even seem to mention it. Can anyone add information on if there was an error and what caused it etc, please. RJFJR (talk) 13:58, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Correction: there are two sentences about it, with six references, but it doesn't go into detail. If Hipparcos was wrong about the Pleiades distance, then why should I believe it about anything else it measured? RJFJR (talk) 14:00, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hipparcos was not wrong about the Pleiades distance. There is an anomaly in the luminosity of the stars and it is not limited to the Pleiades. See [1] Skeptic2 (talk) 00:24, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hipparcos. 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 https://web.archive.org/web/20150616012158/http://www.rssd.esa.int/SA/HIPPARCOS/docs/vol2_all.pdf to https://www.rssd.esa.int/SA/HIPPARCOS/docs/vol2_all.pdf

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 09:54, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In sub section The Pleiades distance controversy I am missing the revised result (presumably 120 parsecs being before the revision).

--Mortense (talk) 22:08, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]