Talk:Kepler-47/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Amitchell125 (talk · contribs) 06:00, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Happy to review the article. Amitchell125 (talk) 06:00, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Assessment: Initial comments

 * All the temperature units should be in K (linked the first time), e.g. 5550 K, as has been done with other articles of this type.
 * Lead section:
 * 3,400 light-years - change to 1040 parsecs (3,400 light years), or, 1040 parsec.
 * the links for star; Earth; and planet are unnecessary (they are common words) and so need to be taken out.
 * Kepler mission and Kepler space telescope lead to the same link (the second link, being unnecessary, should be removed).


 * 'Nomenclature' section:
 * The title 'Nomenclature' needs to be changed to 'Nomenclature and History', as with similar articles, to reflect the text in the section.
 * links are needed for barycenter; luminosity, as they are technical terms.
 * The 2nd/3rd/4th paragraphs of the section overly discuss the topic of exoplanets: some of the details should be summarised more concisely (perhaps in a note), or not included at all (see WP:DETAIL).


 * 'Stellar characteristics' section:
 * Include the distance of Kepler-47 from the Earth, as given in the lead section.


 * 'Planetary system' section:
 * link perturbations (Perturbation (astronomy));
 * move the link for habitable zone up to the first instance it occurs.
 * remove the link for Earth (common term);
 * unlink puffy planets, as the same link is found within the same paragraph ('hot jupiters'); 'Jupiter', not jupiters.
 * super earth - link should read as 'super-Earth'.
 * ...49.5 days. - presumably Earth days?
 * Left and right are planets Kepler-47b and Kepler-47c while the large middle planet is Kepler-47d. Consider replacing with: 'from the left: Kepler-47b; Kepler-47d; and Kepler-47c'.
 * "orphan" - why is the word in quotes?
 * The term 'dynamical models' needs an explanation, I think. I couldn't find an obvious link in Wikipedia.
 * ...7 times the size… - there needs to clarification on what is being referred to here - volume/diameter/mass? I wouldn't use the word size here at all.


 * 'See also' section:
 * Could you make it clearer why these links are included? Consider including: Kepler Mission; List of exoplanets.


 * 'References' section:
 * References 1 and 13 need to be sorted - they don't work.
 * Please amend Reference 19 (citing the The Astronomical Journal), which is actually only ever available via subscription, and is not freely accessible, as stated.
 * References 16 and 17 (citing Universe Today) should have titles that match the titles provided online ('What is the Life Cycle Of The Sun?' and 'What Color is the Sun?').

Nice work - most of the above comments are quite quick to sort out, and I am happy to discuss any points that you are unsure about. I have yet to check the citations with the data in the text. I intend to put the article on hold as soon as I have checked the references and the prose. Amitchell125 (talk) 13:13, 16 September 2019 (UTC)


 * I've edited the article according to your recommendations. For the Nomenclature and history section, I've replaced most instances of star with pair of stars as the Kepler-47 system is a binary star system. I'll be waiting for your next assessments. Nrco0e (talk) 03:11, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Nearly all the above points look sorted. Amitchell125 (talk) 12:13, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Assessment: other comments

 * Lead section
 * I am not convinced that reference 5b (BBC News) is needed in the lead section, it doesn't look as if it provides the required information.
 * ...1040 parsecs (3,400 light years) away from Earth. - the distance of 1040pc needs to be corrected: Reference 1 gives the correct distance (1055.3pc). (The number given in Stellar characteristics section will also need to be changed. I would remove the reference provided in the lead to avoid duplication.)
 * - infobox amended.
 * Because most stars are binary, the discovery that multi-planet systems can form in such a system has impacted previous theories of planetary formation. It is easier to find the source if this pdf link was used, citing p.2.Also, the information here does not appear to be in the main article. I suggest both the entire sentence and its 3 references are moved to the Planetary system section.
 * ...including astronomers from Tel-Aviv University in Israel,... - appears to be missing in the main text (the reference could be moved into the text too).
 * the surface gravity of Kepler-47B 4.9073 is missing (the information here on p.88).


 * Nomenclature and history
 * Hence, this is the name... ... the designations ".01", ".02", ".03" etc. after the star's name, in the order of discovery. I cannot find the relevant text in reference 12 (STSI).


 * Stellar characteristics
 * ... has a temperature of 5778 K. The temperature of the Sun provided by reference 15 is not 5778 K. The source therefore needs to be changed (e.g. with this).
 * ...typically detect objects with a magnitude less than 6. Reference 16 (Sky and Telescope) only implies that stars over 6 are invisible. This source provides the figure of magnitude 6.5. Both the source and the figure of '6' both need to be changed.


 * Planetary system
 * ...in 49.5 Earth days. Consider replacing with 'in less than 50 days', as given by the reference (the more precise number can still be seen in the table).
 * Reference 17 has too many pages for me to verify the text in the article: please cite the correct page numbers for references 17a, b, c,d, e, and f.
 * ...7 times the radius of Earth. Reference 19d gives 'size', which doesn't match your more accurate term 'radius', so the reference is no longer needed.
 * ...a distance of 0.989 AU, nearly the distance from Earth to the Sun. - I cannot find this information in reference 4 (NASA).
 * ...in 303.16 days. - you should really replace '303.16' with 300, which is what the reference says. Alternative give the more precise number, and a citation.
 * It orbits between the planets Kepler-47b and c at a distance of about 0.7 AU,... Planet 47d does not appear to be mentioned in reference 4 (NASA).

I have completed reviewing the article (there might be a bit of minor copy-editing and re-checking to do, which I will do when things look complete). I'm putting the article on hold for a week, it's shaping up nicely. Regards, Amitchell125 (talk) 13:26, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I have completed the rest of your assessments, though I have made a few minor changes: about the distance correction, I cannot change the distance in the star infobox, and could contradict the distance measure of 1055pc in the rest of the article. If you're wondering about the "thirdtransiting" reference, here are pages cited, for the latest revision, for the following: reference 17a and 17b – abstract, pages 1 and 2; 17c, 17d and 17f – Table 6, page 52; 17e – pages 2 and 3. Nrco0e (talk) 23:39, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm now passing this - many thanks for your work on producing an accurate and informative article. There might be a few minor corrections to the punctuation or somthing once I've read it through again, but I'll sort that out. Great work. Amitchell125 (talk) 08:09, 19 September 2019 (UTC)