| Toolbox |
|---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
This is a relatively small article about a red dwarf that is one of the nearest stars to the Solar System. I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to determine what needs to be done to bring it up to a Class A article.
Thank you, RJH (talk) 23:05, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Brianboulton comments:-
- Comprehensiveness: Are you sure that the article is comprehensive, that is to say, fully covers the topic, with all significant information included? I don't have specific knowledge, but I note that the article runs to around 800 words, which seems somewhat brief.
- A big part of the problem there is that the star is very faint so the amount of information available is somewhat limited. Even the composition of the star is not well known. But I can add in some more details about flare studies.
- Structure: The structure of the article is a lead followed by a single section headed "Properties". This does not make for the most attractive presentation, particularly since the section is packed with a forbidding amount of technical detail. It seems to me, even with my limited knowledge, that some subdivision could be made on the basis of different types of "properties".
- Style: In all honesty, off-putting. That's a shame, because general readers like articles about stars, but in this case would probably be deterred by the tone which is suggestive of a specialist publication rather than a general encyclopedia. Is it possible to cover the ground in a more "friendly" fashion, to cater for a wider readership?
- Prose: I have checked out the lead prose, and have the following suggestions.
- Second paragraph: paragraphs should not begin with a pronoun. A possible rewording: "One of the faintest and lowest mass stars known, Wolf359 is a flare star..." Then begin the next sentence "Its surface magnetic tension..." and drop the last hree words.
- "low enough that absorption lines of compounds such as water and titanium(II) oxide have been observed." Not grammatical. I suggest revise to "low enough for absorption lines of compounds such as water and titanium(II) oxide to have been observed."
- Last two sentences: again, grammar problems, and "This" is a weak sentence beginning. I suggest redraft thus: "Wolf359 is a relatively young star, with an age of less then a billion years. No companions or debris have been detected in orbit around it."
The rest of the prose is beyond me, but as I said earlier, some rewriting is advised to make it more approachable. Brianboulton (talk) 22:05, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
- I've tried to address your concerns. Hopefully it reads somewhat better now.—RJH (talk) 16:32, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
- Comments from mav
You should ask WikiProject Astronomy to do an A-class review, since they will be better able to judge comprehensiveness. I recall reading that young red dwarfs tend to be flare stars. Is there a RS theorizing on when or if Wolf 359 will settle down? Any info on the star's metallicity or number of Jupiter radii wide it is? Other than that, a nice little article. --mav (reviews needed) 23:37, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you. Unfortunately WPAstronomy has been relatively inactive of late. The two metallicities I could locate are contradictory, but I'll see if I can dig up more. I didn't see an predictions specific to Wolf 359 with regards to its future activity trend; just the more general one for red dwarfs. I'll add something about the star size in Jupiter radii. Thanks again.—RJH (talk) 17:39, 28 May 2010 (UTC)