Talk:Astronomy (magazine)

NPOV

Wikipedia is not an advertising service. As a longtime reader of Astronomy magazine, I do appreciate the in-depth information in the article. However, practically the entire article is written in an extremely self-promotional style reminiscent of typical corporate press releases. Much of the text seems to have been taken directly from the "About Us" section on the Astronomy magazine website. The article is well written, but the overall promotional tone and complete lack of a neutral point of view (NPOV) make it seem inappropriate in Wikipedia. Hopefully the article can be re-written to better conform with Wikipedia policies. --DannyZ 12:05, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

I believe that the NPOV objections which I raised in the above message (10 August 2007) were largely addressed by the major edit of 21 January 2008 by 209.226.137.108, so I am removing the newsrelease tag that I had added to the head of the article in August. --DannyZ (talk) 06:43, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Astronomy magazine.jpg

Image:Astronomy magazine.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 15:05, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Astronomy Magazine

As far as I am aware, the magazine is titled Astronomy. I think it would therefore be more correct if the article is moved to Astronomy (magazine) with the disambiguiation page entitled Astronomy Magazine, rather than the current reverse situation (though I guess as long as the article can be easily found, it doesn't really matter what the pages are actually called). I suspect such a move cannot easily be achieved, as both page names already exist? --Romney yw (talk) 06:41, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

I actually switched them, because except by luck, I couldn't find the article the other way, so I felt it was easier like this. --Mooshykris (talk) 00:06, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Astronomy (magazine). 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://archive.is/20120604044154/http://abcas3.accessabc.com/ecirc/magform.asp to http://abcas3.accessabc.com/ecirc/magform.asp

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) 02:40, 11 July 2017 (UTC)