![]() | HIP 13044 b was one of the Natural sciences good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
![]() | A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
November 22, 2010. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that
HIP 13044 b (artist's impression pictured), discovered in November 2010, is the first known case of a planet which originated outside of our galaxy, but then got absorbed into it? | ||||||||||||
Current status: Delisted good article |
![]() | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
From the article:
Where's the challenge here? Just because one planetary system probably was formed via the disk instability model doesn't mean that the core-accretion model can't apply elsewhere. Consider the paper, "Planetary Formation Scenarios Revisited: Core-Accretion versus Disk Instability" [ http://iopscience.iop.org/0004-637X/662/2/1282/]. From the abstract:
In other words, we already have strong indication that both models apply to planetary formation. Hence, discovering another planet which could only form with one model doesn't imply a challenge to the other model. -- KarlHallowell ( talk) 13:34, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
Are there any image experts here? Does any one have an idea if the telescope image is ok to download? The image for the planet itself says:
Is that also true of the telescope image? I already built a page for MPG/ESO telescope and would be good to have a picture of the telescope too, both there and here. I can download it, but a "yes" on licensing will help. Or if you know it is ok and want to download and add it, that would be good to. Thanks. History2007 ( talk) 05:19, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Wizardman Operation Big Bear 16:04, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
I'll review this article shortly. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 16:04, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
Here are the issues I found:
I'll put this on hold and will pass it when the issues are fixed. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 13:51, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
This is not a requirement for GA status, but I was just curious why The planet's discovery was announced on November 18, 2010. has seven cites. Is it controversial AIRcorn (talk) 01:27, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
Should this article, like the one about its star, be placed in Category:Helmi stream? -- Black Falcon ( talk) 23:20, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
See this article published in A&A - [1] -- follow-up observations failed to confirm the existence of this planet. 77.56.99.23 ( talk) 10:11, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
This is a procedural delist as the article is a redirect. AIRcorn (talk) 20:54, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
![]() | HIP 13044 b was one of the Natural sciences good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
![]() | A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
November 22, 2010. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that
HIP 13044 b (artist's impression pictured), discovered in November 2010, is the first known case of a planet which originated outside of our galaxy, but then got absorbed into it? | ||||||||||||
Current status: Delisted good article |
![]() | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
From the article:
Where's the challenge here? Just because one planetary system probably was formed via the disk instability model doesn't mean that the core-accretion model can't apply elsewhere. Consider the paper, "Planetary Formation Scenarios Revisited: Core-Accretion versus Disk Instability" [ http://iopscience.iop.org/0004-637X/662/2/1282/]. From the abstract:
In other words, we already have strong indication that both models apply to planetary formation. Hence, discovering another planet which could only form with one model doesn't imply a challenge to the other model. -- KarlHallowell ( talk) 13:34, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
Are there any image experts here? Does any one have an idea if the telescope image is ok to download? The image for the planet itself says:
Is that also true of the telescope image? I already built a page for MPG/ESO telescope and would be good to have a picture of the telescope too, both there and here. I can download it, but a "yes" on licensing will help. Or if you know it is ok and want to download and add it, that would be good to. Thanks. History2007 ( talk) 05:19, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Wizardman Operation Big Bear 16:04, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
I'll review this article shortly. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 16:04, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
Here are the issues I found:
I'll put this on hold and will pass it when the issues are fixed. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 13:51, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
This is not a requirement for GA status, but I was just curious why The planet's discovery was announced on November 18, 2010. has seven cites. Is it controversial AIRcorn (talk) 01:27, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
Should this article, like the one about its star, be placed in Category:Helmi stream? -- Black Falcon ( talk) 23:20, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
See this article published in A&A - [1] -- follow-up observations failed to confirm the existence of this planet. 77.56.99.23 ( talk) 10:11, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
This is a procedural delist as the article is a redirect. AIRcorn (talk) 20:54, 20 April 2018 (UTC)