Talk:Tip of the red-giant branch

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 10:04, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

So how does it work?

Unfortunately, the most important element in the article is missing: How does the method work to calculate distances? Best regards, --Trinitrix (talk) 14:58, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Copy edits

A set of edits made the article worse, so I reverted the whole edit. This has been reverted, so I'll comment here before reverting again. 1) "their composition of elements heavier than helium (metallicity) and their mass" -> "their metallicity or their mass": "metallicity" is a jargon term which should be defined in this article at first use. I don't think a wikilink is sufficient when it can be explained very easily for readers who are not versed in astronomical jargon. 2) "and" -> "or": ok, kept. 3) semicolon to period: "they are a standard candle..." comes very directly from the statement that the luminosity is insensitive to metallicity or mass, so I think should be separated by a semicolon, not put in a different sentence. 4) "This makes the technique especially useful as a distance indicator." -> "This makes it an especially useful tool as a distance indicator." I think the pronoun "it" is somewhat ambiguous, so using "the technique" is more clear but makes "tool" unnecessary. —Alex (Ashill | talk | contribs) 17:07, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

The same editor changed "they [TRGB stars] are a standard candle" to "they provide a standard candle". Candle refers to the object (the star in this case), so "are" is the correct verb. If the star just "provides" a standard candle, what is the standard candle it provides? —Alex (Ashill | talk | contribs) 15:51, 21 August 2015 (UTC)