Talk:TrES-2b

size comparison image

Considering its placement, and the fact the planet is the darkest known planet, shouldnt we use a comparison that has a dark colored planet instead of a bright solid white one? -Tracer9999 (talk) 14:21, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

I was thinking the same, especially with its darkness making the news. Hard to put a black planet on a black backdrop, though. Maybe change the background to white? Or does the background need to remain black to represent space? Jeffhoy (talk) 13:27, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

How about grey? I don't think black is necessary, as a planet being in space is implied by it...umm...existing. 206.28.38.227 (talk) 16:39, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

The image comparing it to Jupiter could not be worse. It depicts TrES-2b as off-white, with some shading as if it really looks that way. I am removing it as WP:Original Research. Speciate (talk) 03:37, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Considering the original purpose of the picture was to make a size comparison, not an appearance comparison, I think it was a bit hasty to simply delete the image instead of replacing it with a better one. Deleting the image outright has in effect removed useful information from the article, and should (IMO) be reverted until such time that someone can make a better image. 206.28.38.227 (talk) 05:49, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Kepler Mission

Kepler's full field of view first light image of the investigated area. The location of TrES-2b within this image is shown.

Detail of Kepler's image of the investigated area. The location of TrES-2b within this image is shown.

The importance of this object has recently had a boost as it is an identified extrasolar planet in the field of view of the Kepler planet-hunter spacecraft's photometer. TrES-2b's parent star is clearly visible and identified on the mission's first-light images. According to the image captions this object will be used to confirm proper operation and for targeted study. We should know a lot more about this object very soon.[1] Aldebaran66 (talk) 00:49, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Emo Planet

We need to include the fact that this planet has been identified as the darkest known planet, reflecting less than 1% of the sunlight that hits it.

Sources: http://www.space.com/12612-alien-planet-darkest-coal-black-kepler.html http://www.heraldsun.com.au/technology/sci-tech/emo-planet-tres-2b-comes-in-black-and-light-black/story-fn5iztw3-1226113811092 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xelanared (talk • contribs) 06:13, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Added. Please recheck grammar and formating. OverQuantum (talk) 11:30, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

"Sunlight" too specific

It's true that TrES-2b reflects less than 1% of the sunlight that hits it, but this is also true of all other light that hits it as well. Sunlight is light specifically emitted by the Sun, which is a specific star and not a generalized term for a planet's parent star. While I'll admit it's a nitpicky thing, the term "sunlight" should be changed to simply "light", as it matters not what star (or source in general) that light originates. As a suggested replacement: "The planet has been identified in 2011 as the darkest known exoplanet, reflecting less than 1% of the light that hits it." Not perfect, but better IMO. 206.28.38.227 (talk) 05:58, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Good point. Done. a_man_alone (talk) 15:36, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on TrES-2b. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.astro.princeton.edu/~dsp/PrincetonSite/Home_files/darkest_world.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 18:36, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on TrES-2b. 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/20110918035040/http://www.astronomynow.com/news/n1108/11exo/ to http://www.astronomynow.com/news/n1108/11exo/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060919004337/http://www.astro.caltech.edu/~ftod/tres/tres2.html to http://www.astro.caltech.edu/~ftod/tres/tres2.html

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) 22:29, 25 January 2018 (UTC)