Talk:Habitability of K-type main-sequence star systems

I removed reference to research suggesting stars within 0.8 AUs would likely get their atmospheres stripped, since it referred to planets circling a particular red dwarf star which was in a trinary system with two K type stars rather than planets orbiting a K-type star.AJBurn (talk) 02:17, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

Confusing/unclear point, and a paywalled source.
First paragraph, third sentence: "These stars are known as "Goldilocks stars" and they emit enough radiation in the non-UV ray spectrum[2] to provide a temperature that allows liquid water to exist on the surface of a planet orbiting around a K-type main-sequence star in the habitable zone." I may be the confused one here, but I thought "enough radiation...that allows liquid water to exist on the surface of a planet..." was part of the definition of "habitable zone" - regardless of what type of star (such as Earth and The Sun). Further, the source is paywalled. Rather than try to change it myself and make things worse, I'm choosing to note the issue here, instead. 47.185.98.94 (talk) 02:51, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
 * That's a very interesting point. I'll try to remember to look into this, hopefully find the original source. But you're right, it is kind of odd phrasing. Primefac (talk) 12:03, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅. Feedback is always appreciated. Primefac (talk) 12:32, 9 May 2017 (UTC)