Talk:Leviathan of Parsonstown

Ireland Mid‑importance

	Ireland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ireland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ireland 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.IrelandWikipedia:WikiProject IrelandTemplate:WikiProject IrelandIreland articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Astronomy Mid‑importance

	Astronomy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.AstronomyWikipedia:WikiProject AstronomyTemplate:WikiProject AstronomyAstronomy articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled[edit]

The current situation is that the hydraulics have been rebuilt, the automation system has been upgraded and the telescope is almost ready to be recommissoined. It is expected that this will be completed before August 2007. Bob Strunz

Sorry, I'm a complete novice to Wikipedia editing, forgive me if I'm using the wrong process . I notice that article states that the I-Lofar was the first to observe Wolf 359, while the citation for that claim states it was the first to observe CN Leo, not Wolf 359. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.24.45.133 (talk) 00:22, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The two names are for the same object; Wolf 359 is the title of the Wikipedia page, CN Leo is a redirection to it. Chi And H (talk) 16:58, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not In use[edit]

insurance reasons? Its not used because the hydraulics (or whatever moves the scope!) is busted. AFAIK the reasons why its still not correctly repaired are to do with funding. --Albert.white 20:50, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When I was there last summer I was told that it wasn't open to the public for insurance reasons but it was availabvle for specific privately organized astronomical groups. Don't know about the hydraulics. Dabbler 16:23, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting, the last I heard about it was at the Whirlpool Star party which holds an observing session on the grounds every year. Every year we hope to get to use the scope but each time we are told of technical rather than insurance reasons. I'll see if I can find a definitive answer from some local amateur astronomers... http://www.irishastronomy.org/boards/viewtopic.php?t=6157 --Albert.white 19:31, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Leviathan of Parsonstown. 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/20131029195547/http://bulletin.kenyon.edu/x1446.xml to http://bulletin.kenyon.edu/x1446.xml
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080927225844/http://www.birrcastle.com/telescopeRestoration.asp to http://www.birrcastle.com/telescopeRestoration.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: 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) 02:57, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Units[edit]

There is tendency to round telescope units and the autoconvert will round 72 inches to 180 cm, but its 183. What happened was over time people put in 1.8 meter which converted to less that 72 inches, creating a mess of units here. Fotaun (talk) 15:07, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Would using 183-centimetre (72 in) get around the problem? That was done with convert with the diameter in centimetres first, converting to inches (see the code by editing this page to see the full method used here). TowardsTheLight (talk) 16:10, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure, on wikidata somone had inputed the diameter as 1.8 meter, which came out as 5 foot 11 on the page (since fixed for the time being). This is what turned me on to the problem when I realized, it was an even 6 feet. In fact wikidata and autoconvert has created many such inaccuracies for telescope data, which tend to have a greater concern for accuracy. Fotaun (talk) 16:27, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]