[ These comments are in addition to comments in original tables in McConnachie (2012, AJ, 144, 4) ] October 2019: Note on central surface brightnesses - The central surface brightness for many recent discoveries, especially around the MW, is in some cases not given in the relevant papers. In these situations, I have estimated the central surface brightness given the half-light radius and the magnitude, under the assumption that the profile is well fit by an exponential profile (using Graham & Driver, equations 5 and 7, for n=1). I estimate the uncertainty on the central surface brightness as being equivalent to the uncertainty on the total magnitude, plus an additional 0.5 mags. Note that for these calculations, I have used the goemetric mean half light radius, Rh=sqrt(a*b), if the ellipticity is known, and assumed circular otherwise ------------------------------------ Potential candidate objects not in the table: - Crater/Leavens I: Discovered by Leavens et al. 2014. Belokurov et al. 2014. Kirby et al. 2015 confirm it to be a globular cluster (Belokurov et al. originally suggested it might be a dwarf galaxy). - DES J0034-4902 (DES 1): Discovered by Luque et al. (2015); authors believe it to be a GC ------------------------------------ Other comments: KK258 Magnitude and surface brightness are estimates in the B-band (Karachentsev et al. 2013) Cetus Stellar velocity dispersion from Kirby et al. 2013 (8.3km/s) is very different (4-sigma) to previous estimate from Lewis et al. (2007) (17km/s). This might partly be due to membership selection criteria, but this is unlikely to account for the full difference. Leo A Stellar velocity dispersion from Kirby et al. 2013 (6.7km/s) is notably lower than previous estimate from Brown et al. (2007) (9.3km/s). However, Kirby's measurement is based on RGB stars whereas Brown's comes from young stars and HII regions. Segue II Recent work my Kirby et al. suggest that the 90% upper confidence limit for the velocity dispersion is 2.2km/s, slightly lower than the preferred value by Belokurov et al. Andromeda V - Notable (perhaps not "significant"!) change in metallicity estimate from Collins et al. 2011 (Fe/H~-1.6+/0.3) to Collins et al. 2013 (Fe/H~-2+/-0.1) - Andromeda X, XII, XIV, XV, XVI, XVII, XVIII, XIX, XX, XXI, XXII (Conn et al. 2012): Updated distance estimates using Conn et al. 2012 TRGB distances estimates (ref 202). These are all faint galaxies for which the previous estimates were also based on TRGB distances. Additionally, Conn et al. provide distance estimates for Andromeda I, II, III, V, IX, XI, XIII, XXIII, XXIV, XXV, XXVI, XXVII, NGC147, 185, M33 and M31. These have not been replaced since they are either bright galaxies with reliable TRGB estimates, or faint galaxies that used HB or RR Lyrae distances. Note that the Conn et al. distances to Andromeda IX, XXIV, XXV and XXVII are notably different from values in McConnachie et al. 2005 and Richardson et al. 2011. Andromeda III - Stellar velocity dispersion in table (from Tollerud et al 2012) notably higher than in Kalirai et al. 2010. Andromeda II - Maximum rotational velocity measured along axis with position angle PA_{kinematic} = 113+/-9degrees (notably different from photometric P.A.) [ref 204]. M33 - Recent distance estimate by Gieren et al. 2013 based on NIR Cepheids gives distance modulus of 24.62, in general agreement with the preferred TRGB measurement. The latter is the distance quoted in the table since the technique is similar to many of the other M31 sub-group members. WLM - Stellar velocity dispersion profile clearly not flat UGC 4879 - Stellar RV now resolves previous discrepancy between stellar and HI velocity measurements (ref 200) - Upper limit on rotation of 8.6km/s (ref 200) Leo P - Skillman et al. 2013 derive a metallicity from spectroscopy of an HII region in this galaxy (very metal deficient), although only metallicities for resolved stars are listed in the table. KKR25 - Velocity estimate in Makarov et al 2012 based on integrated light (and a planetary nebula) is very different to previous velocity based on HI measurements by Huchtmeier et al. 2003, with the conclusion that the HI is not associated with KKR25. See also Begum & Chengalur (2005, MNRAS, 362, 609) who fail to detect any HI in this galaxy. - Some weak evidence for stellar population gradients; structural profile best describe as an exponential decay but with a constant surface brightness in the central regions. Structural parameters in table correspond to "all stellar populations", as listed in Table 3 of Makarov et al. 2012. Half-light radius is based on exponential scale radius and does not take into account central depression of profile.