Talk:Beta Pictoris

Copyright violation
This edit has incorporated material copied directly from the website SolStation, which is copyrighted. I have thus reverted the article per WP:CP. Icalanise (talk) 22:25, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Spelling
As part of the peer review it was noted that the article contained a mixture of British and American spelling. While I would prefer to use the British spelling, it is an unfortunate fact that the infobox uses the spelling "color", which forced my hand. Icalanise (talk) 17:53, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Planet b should have its own page
Most directly imaged planets have their own page on Wikipedia separate from the page on its host star. This one does not. There are now several papers published that describe the properties of the planet in detail. I vote for creating a Beta Pictoris b page. I can start it. Any objections? Martin Cash (talk) 19:51, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Interstellar meteoroids
This is the first I have heard of them. Have they been definitely confirmed to exist in the solar system, as the lead section of this article seems to imply, or are they purely theoretical? According to this, "the identiﬁcation of the vast majority...has been caused by an erroneous determination of their heliocentric velocity and/or other parameters", and furthermore, "Neither any concentration of radiants to the Sun’s apex, nor any distribution following the motion of interstellar material has been found" (whatever that means). Apologies if this question is addressed somewhere in the article already. Signedzzz (talk) 06:06, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Surface temperature comes from nowhere
I think the citation [2] is wrong for the effective temperature, because that paper doesn't mention Beta Pictoris at all. Theosib (talk) 16:50, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
 * It is mentioned as HIP27321/HD39060. Ruslik_ Zero 20:32, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 one external links on Beta Pictoris. 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/20081011114219/http://www.astro.uiuc.edu/~kaler/sow/betapic.html to http://www.astro.uiuc.edu/~kaler/sow/betapic.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081011114219/http://www.astro.uiuc.edu/~kaler/sow/betapic.html to http://www.astro.uiuc.edu/~kaler/sow/betapic.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060827003246/http://www.ari.uni-heidelberg.de:80/aricns/cnspages/4c00467.htm to http://www.ari.uni-heidelberg.de/aricns/cnspages/4c00467.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051209011731/http://www.seds.org:80/~spider/spider/Misc/betaPic.html to http://www.seds.org/~spider/spider/Misc/betaPic.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 23:44, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Question
Are the hyphens in The IRAS data are (at the micron wavelengths): [12]=2.68, [25]=0.05, [60]=--2.74 and [100]=--3.41. The colourexcesses are: E12=0.69, E25=3.35, E60=6.17 and E100=6.90 weird ascii minus signs or are they actually meant to be double hyphens?  Nixinova  T  C  07:08, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Inconsistency regarding HIP 46950 / HD83058
In this article: "which is now a runaway star"

Article on HD 83058: "HD 83058 was proposed as a runaway star from a supernova explosion. However, the discovery that it was a binary make this unlikely." with a reference that is already from 2010. Gohan71 (talk) 09:37, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
 * HD 83058 is still a runaway star, it has a space velocity outside of the normal range for stars that formed in the same vicinity. The reason for that was proposed to be a supernova explosion, a relatively obvious and simple way to eject a star from its home cluster, but being a spectroscopic binary makes that explanation far less likely since the star that exploded would have had to be in a very close orbit and would be very unlikely to eject two stars in a tight orbit.  Still, there are other ways to eject stars from their formation cluster and the basic premise is unchanged.  I'll tweak the article and include newer references on the topic.  Lithopsian (talk) 14:56, 1 May 2022 (UTC)