Talk:Alpha Cephei

Sun-like Star Controversy

The article states that Alpha Cephei is a "fairly sun-like star" but A class stars such as Alpha Cephei are are certainly not sun-like. They are more massive, significantly hotter and shorter-lived. This should be removed or changed.

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Alpha Cephei. 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/20081025110153/http://www.lcsd.gov.hk/CE/Museum/Space/Research/StarName/c_research_chinengstars_ala_alz.htm to http://www.lcsd.gov.hk/CE/Museum/Space/Research/StarName/c_research_chinengstars_ala_alz.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 19:10, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Rename to Alderamin
Searching Google Scholar, I saw that the proper name Alderamin is much more used than Alpha Cephei. Searching "Alpha Cephei", I found 7 sources citing it in the first five pages. Meanwhile, I found 19 sources citing the name Alderamin in the first five pages, 2.79 times more. This would mean that Alderamin is the common name for this star, and should be the name of the article. InTheAstronomy32 (talk) 19:44, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

Requested move 4 February 2024

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Based on sources provided and searches performed, it is currently unclear as to what the best title for this article is. This can and should be discussed further at a later date, but presently there is no consensus on the proposed move. (closed by non-admin page mover) 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 00:34, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Alpha Cephei → Alderamin – Searching Google Scholar, i saw that the proper name Alderamin is much more used than the Bayer Designation Alpha Cephei. In the first five search pages, i got 19 sources citing the name Alderamin, while i got just 7 sources citing the name Alpha Cephei, which means that Alderamin is the common name for this star, and thus should be the name of this article. InTheAstronomy32 (talk) 20:29, 4 February 2024 (UTC) — Relisting.  ❯❯❯  Raydann  (Talk)   16:38, 12 February 2024 (UTC)  — Relisting. BilledMammal (talk) 19:15, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: WikiProject Astronomy has been notified of this discussion.  ❯❯❯  Raydann  (Talk)   16:38, 12 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose. Per WP:NCASTRO, 'preference should be given to the name used in the more reliable sources. For astronomical objects, papers in scientific journals or publications of the International Astronomical Union (IAU) are regarded as more reliable'. The name Alderamin is rare in the scientific literature. Searching SIMBAD and ADS I found 358 publications that mention this star, of which only 55 even mention the name 'Alderamin' (not use it as their preferred way of referring to the star). The Bayer designation appears to be substantially more common than that e.g. ADS gives me 147 hits for full:("Alpha Cephei" or "α Cephei"). I suspect your Google search is being confused by α vs alpha; SIMBAD & ADS are better databases for astronomy anyway. Modest Genius talk 16:54, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
 * If the name Alderamin were rare in scientific literature, it wouldn't have so many results                               citing it as the principal name for its star.
 * Also remember that these results in ADS often pick up words even if they are not cited consecutively. For example, "Copernicus OAO observations of Beta Cephei and Alpha Virginis" cites the words Alpha and Cephei, but they are used in different contexts, not to mention the star Alpha Cephei.


 * When I searched for "Alpha Cephei" on Google Scholar, many results appeared like "A Spectroscopic Analysis of the Beta-Cephei Star Alpha-Lupi" | "Resonant scattering of NaI and KI in the circumstellar envelopes of Alpha Orionis and MU Cephei-Observations" | "Observations of H-alpha Emission in VV Cephei"" etc, while the results for "Alderamin" were more direct and related to the topic.


 * You need to check whether all these 147 results are linked to the star or are just things like "Spectroscopic study of two O-type supergiants, Alpha Camelopardalis and 19 Cephei: model-atmosphere analysis."


 * Also, most papers dedicated for Alpha Cephei (and similar stars) uses mostly the proper name intsead of the Bayer designation. Examples include:


 * "First results from the CHARA Array. III. Oblateness, rotational velocity, and gravity darkening of Alderamin"


 * "Imaging And Modeling Rapidly Rotating Stars: Rasalhague And Alderamin"


 * "Interferometric Observations of Rapidly Rotating Stars: (A review of the current collection of published results-including Altair, Regulus, Alderamin and Achernar-will be presented, and prospects for expanded and enhanced efforts in this area)"


 * "Interferometric studies of rapid rotators: The model of Alderamin suggests it is inclined by 56o and is rotating at ~92.6% of its … equator of Alderamin is probably also convective. This similar feature of both Alderamin and Altair ..."


 * "Stellar Atmosphere Models for Select VERITAS Stellar Intensity Interferometry Targets: Alderamin has an equatorial velocity of 251.66 … Alderamin for each 10-hour (u, v) track in Figure 2b. Telescope pair T3-T4 yields the lowest projected baseline on average for Alderamin" InTheAstronomy32 (talk) 15:29, 14 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Notice that I used quotes in the ADS search, which prevents exactly the issue you suggest. Google Scholar is far less useful for astronomy than ADS is. Otherwise, that's a huge wall of badly formatted text that doesn't actually address the issue: the Bayer designation is more widely used in the astronomical literature. Modest Genius talk 19:51, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
 * If you want papers that are specifically about that star (rather than just mention it), ADS finds 24 hits (16 refereed) with the Bayer designation in their abstract or title, vs only 6 (3 refereed) for Alderamin. Modest Genius talk 19:54, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * Support per nom. Per provided sources, seems like scientific circles do use Alderamin, and casual circles DEFINITELY use it.  SnowFire (talk) 18:48, 29 February 2024 (UTC)