L(Hα) from old stars The observed W(Hα) of many ‘LINERs’ is compatible with ionization by their HOLMES definition: RGs are ELGs with WHα < 3 Å. For WHα < 3 Å, the central black hole may well be active ( accreting), but its ionizing photon output is comparable to or wea than that produced by HOLMES. For Wold Hα values between 1 2 Å, which are compatible with current models (bottom panel Fig. 2), one finds that at our proposed WHα = 3 Å borderline AGN contributes between ∼1/3 and 2/3 of the ionizing pow Naturally, this fraction decreases even more as WHα decreases the point that AGN contribution is negligible for the bulk of the WHα population. It is therefore not correct to use the emission li of WHα < 3 Å systems to infer AGN properties. 5 A COMPREHENSIVE CLASSIFICATION OF GALAXIES We are now able to separate fake AGN (= RGs) from true AG In the LINER zone of Fig. 1, true AGN are defined by 3 < WHα 6 Å. To avoid confusion, we shall call these sources ‘wAGN’ the interest of a consistent notation, we shall also rename Seyf as ‘sAGN’. Finally, we remove from the SF category those galax consistent with a RG classification, that is to say those having WH 3 Å. Our final classification scheme is shown in Fig. 6. Sample sources split into percentage fractions of 22, 21, 8, 31 and 18 sAGN, wAGN, RG and PG, respectively. RGs therefore exis large numbers in the SDSS, in agreement with the basic predict that such systems are bound to exits as a mere consequence of ste evolution. AGN, on the other hand, are far less common than would infer associating all LINERs to non-stellar activity. 1694 R. Cid Fernandes et al. done for the ξ distribution, but it is clearly advantageous to d this boundary on the basis of a universally available and mo independent quantity: WHα . We conducted various experiments to define an optimal bound to separate the two peaks, all giving results between 3 and 4 Å. settled for WHα = 3 Å. We thus propose to the following pract definition: RGs are ELGs with WHα < 3 Å. For WHα < 3 Å, the central black hole may well be active accreting), but its ionizing photon output is comparable to or wea than that produced by HOLMES. For Wold Hα values between 1 2 Å, which are compatible with current models (bottom panel Fig. 2), one finds that at our proposed WHα = 3 Å borderline AGN contributes between ∼1/3 and 2/3 of the ionizing pow Naturally, this fraction decreases even more as WHα decreases the point that AGN contribution is negligible for the bulk of the WHα population. It is therefore not correct to use the emission li of WHα < 3 Å systems to infer AGN properties. 5 A COMPREHENSIVE CLASSIFICATION OF GALAXIES We are now able to separate fake AGN (= RGs) from true AG In the LINER zone of Fig. 1, true AGN are defined by 3 < WH 6 Å. To avoid confusion, we shall call these sources ‘wAGN’ the interest of a consistent notation, we shall also rename Seyf HOLMES HOLMES+ other ionizing sources LINERs? *low-ionization nuclear emission regions