This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Sirius article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2 |
Sirius is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on July 2, 2010, and on March 21, 2021. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the " On this day..." column on January 31, 2009, January 31, 2010, January 31, 2011, January 31, 2015, January 31, 2017, January 31, 2019, January 31, 2020, and August 10, 2022. | |||||||||||||
Current status: Featured article |
This
level-4 vital article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Other talk page banners | |||||
|
Under the section 'Apparent Third Star', a reference is made to "0.09 arcseconds". If someone just hovers over 'mas' and reads what the popup says, they might think mas means 'minute of arc'. In other words, it would be nice if when you hover cursor over mas, the first word you see is 'milliarcseconds'. 162.207.203.26 ( talk) 04:47, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
It has been suggested that the furture fate of Sirius B is to become a type Ia supernova, and although uncited that this is obvious. This is not obvious. Only a small proportion of white dwarfs will ever become a supernova. We still don't fully understand (or understand at all) exactly what type of situation produces a type Ia supernova but it is relatively (relatively, as in extremely) rare compared to the number of white dwarf binaries. Regardless, it would certainly not be obvious to the average non-astronomer that this would be the case, so a reliable source is required before including it in the article. Lithopsian ( talk) 16:56, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
Sirius A has 2 Solar masses. Don't stars from 1.4 Solar masses on go supernova, becoming neutron stars or black holes? Why shall Sirius A share a similar fate like the Sun? 212.186.15.63 ( talk) 06:37, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
References
There is a dramatic layout mess and MOS:SANDWICHing throughout ... could someone address this ? SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 19:41, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
This article has been proposed to run as today's featured article in March. ( Click here for more details.) However, I have some concerns that this article might not meet featured article criteria. Some of my concerns include:
Would anyone be interested in working on this article to get it ready for TFA? I'm pinging Casliber although any help would be appreciated. Z1720 ( talk) 01:16, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
How's it looking so far? I know there are still a couple of citation needed tags. One is related to ancient understanding of the Sothic cycle which I'm probably not going to be much help with, although the whole claim looks slightly dubious. The other is about the position of Sirius in 14,000 years. I have checked the calculation and it appears correct, with proper motion included, but can't find any source to explicitly make the same claim. Lithopsian ( talk) 20:32, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
Strangely enough, a lot of time is spent explaining in which constellations stars live, but the galaxy to which they belong seems to be never mentioned. Sounds like prehistoric thinking to me... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.192.35.12 ( talk) 19:11, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
@ Lithopsian: - https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Sirius&diff=prev&oldid=1027586003, I don't disagree, but if you know the date the sentence was written @ the article, i.e. which is a copy is determinable by comparison of the dates of publication ... as you know Autonomous agent 5 ( talk) 20:12, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
The proper motion value in the infobox sets its reference as van Leeuwen, F. (November 2007), doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20078357, but that paper does not mention Sirius at all. Urhixidur ( talk) 19:38, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
Is it really relevant that Sirius is "the fifth closest stellar system"? I would suppose that the reader would be more interested in learning, that Sirius is the seventh closest system, after Alpha Centauri, Barnard's Star, Luhman 16 (no star!), WISE J085510.74-071442.5 (no star!), Wolf 359, and HD 95735. I suggest that the passage is rephrased to "and it is the seventh closest system to the Sun" and a link is added to the article List_of_nearest_stars_and_brown_dwarfs. CalRis ( talk) 12:35, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
The absolute magnitude stated on Sirius A is said to be 1.42 I downloaded the cited source and in there it's stated (twice) that it's actually -1.42
"This was determined through a comparison with stars in the North Polar Sequence5, or bright stars in the vicinity of Sirius, and yielded mV (Sirius)=–1.42±0.03,..." (Page 97, also table at page 189)
This is also in range of the absolute magnitude stated by other sources. E.g. VizieR states that it's -1.58 ( http://vizier.u-strasbg.fr/viz-bin/VizieR-S?HD%2048915 ) 2A02:8388:A84:DE80:49CE:24BF:CEC0:7D04 ( talk) 17:41, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
Surface gravity is expressed as an acceleration, conventionally, m/s2. Expressing it as cgs is gibberish. cgs is centimetre gram scale, a general description of a scale system, not a unit of acceleration. Sadly, this error has made its irritating wsy into almost every wiki on stars. Also log g is meaningless. There are many different logs, ln, log10 etc. It is therefore necessary to specify which log is being quoted. 209.93.146.80 ( talk) 10:17, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
Why does Sirius B has a surface temperature of 25,000 Kelvins, while it has a radius 0.0084 times that of the Sun and also a luminosity 0.056 times that of the Sun? Aminabzz ( talk) 21:25, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Sirius article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2 |
Sirius is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on July 2, 2010, and on March 21, 2021. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the " On this day..." column on January 31, 2009, January 31, 2010, January 31, 2011, January 31, 2015, January 31, 2017, January 31, 2019, January 31, 2020, and August 10, 2022. | |||||||||||||
Current status: Featured article |
This
level-4 vital article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Other talk page banners | |||||
|
Under the section 'Apparent Third Star', a reference is made to "0.09 arcseconds". If someone just hovers over 'mas' and reads what the popup says, they might think mas means 'minute of arc'. In other words, it would be nice if when you hover cursor over mas, the first word you see is 'milliarcseconds'. 162.207.203.26 ( talk) 04:47, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
It has been suggested that the furture fate of Sirius B is to become a type Ia supernova, and although uncited that this is obvious. This is not obvious. Only a small proportion of white dwarfs will ever become a supernova. We still don't fully understand (or understand at all) exactly what type of situation produces a type Ia supernova but it is relatively (relatively, as in extremely) rare compared to the number of white dwarf binaries. Regardless, it would certainly not be obvious to the average non-astronomer that this would be the case, so a reliable source is required before including it in the article. Lithopsian ( talk) 16:56, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
Sirius A has 2 Solar masses. Don't stars from 1.4 Solar masses on go supernova, becoming neutron stars or black holes? Why shall Sirius A share a similar fate like the Sun? 212.186.15.63 ( talk) 06:37, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
References
There is a dramatic layout mess and MOS:SANDWICHing throughout ... could someone address this ? SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 19:41, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
This article has been proposed to run as today's featured article in March. ( Click here for more details.) However, I have some concerns that this article might not meet featured article criteria. Some of my concerns include:
Would anyone be interested in working on this article to get it ready for TFA? I'm pinging Casliber although any help would be appreciated. Z1720 ( talk) 01:16, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
How's it looking so far? I know there are still a couple of citation needed tags. One is related to ancient understanding of the Sothic cycle which I'm probably not going to be much help with, although the whole claim looks slightly dubious. The other is about the position of Sirius in 14,000 years. I have checked the calculation and it appears correct, with proper motion included, but can't find any source to explicitly make the same claim. Lithopsian ( talk) 20:32, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
Strangely enough, a lot of time is spent explaining in which constellations stars live, but the galaxy to which they belong seems to be never mentioned. Sounds like prehistoric thinking to me... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.192.35.12 ( talk) 19:11, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
@ Lithopsian: - https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Sirius&diff=prev&oldid=1027586003, I don't disagree, but if you know the date the sentence was written @ the article, i.e. which is a copy is determinable by comparison of the dates of publication ... as you know Autonomous agent 5 ( talk) 20:12, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
The proper motion value in the infobox sets its reference as van Leeuwen, F. (November 2007), doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20078357, but that paper does not mention Sirius at all. Urhixidur ( talk) 19:38, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
Is it really relevant that Sirius is "the fifth closest stellar system"? I would suppose that the reader would be more interested in learning, that Sirius is the seventh closest system, after Alpha Centauri, Barnard's Star, Luhman 16 (no star!), WISE J085510.74-071442.5 (no star!), Wolf 359, and HD 95735. I suggest that the passage is rephrased to "and it is the seventh closest system to the Sun" and a link is added to the article List_of_nearest_stars_and_brown_dwarfs. CalRis ( talk) 12:35, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
The absolute magnitude stated on Sirius A is said to be 1.42 I downloaded the cited source and in there it's stated (twice) that it's actually -1.42
"This was determined through a comparison with stars in the North Polar Sequence5, or bright stars in the vicinity of Sirius, and yielded mV (Sirius)=–1.42±0.03,..." (Page 97, also table at page 189)
This is also in range of the absolute magnitude stated by other sources. E.g. VizieR states that it's -1.58 ( http://vizier.u-strasbg.fr/viz-bin/VizieR-S?HD%2048915 ) 2A02:8388:A84:DE80:49CE:24BF:CEC0:7D04 ( talk) 17:41, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
Surface gravity is expressed as an acceleration, conventionally, m/s2. Expressing it as cgs is gibberish. cgs is centimetre gram scale, a general description of a scale system, not a unit of acceleration. Sadly, this error has made its irritating wsy into almost every wiki on stars. Also log g is meaningless. There are many different logs, ln, log10 etc. It is therefore necessary to specify which log is being quoted. 209.93.146.80 ( talk) 10:17, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
Why does Sirius B has a surface temperature of 25,000 Kelvins, while it has a radius 0.0084 times that of the Sun and also a luminosity 0.056 times that of the Sun? Aminabzz ( talk) 21:25, 20 May 2023 (UTC)