Talk:Proxima Centauri/GA1

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

I just did a copy edit of the article. It is very close to meeting the good articles criteria, and only needs work with the prose, especially for portions that are unclear or use jargon. Portions to be addressed:


 * 1) Passive voice:
 * (a) "This star is thought to be part of the Alpha Centauri system"
 * Try not to use "thought to be" in this case. State all information as fact; either explain who thought up this fact, or simply state the fact with a citation.
 * [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|15px]] Done: phrase is no longer given in passive voice
 * 1) Clarity of prose
 * (a) "the star displayed a measurable increase in magnitude about 8% of the time"
 * When did the star's magnitude increase? What does "the time" refer to? Does this portion mean that the star's magnitude increased measurable during 8% of all observations, during 8% of all flares, or something else? Do clarify.
 * [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|15px]] Done: nominator changed it to "...increase in magnitude on about 8% of the images ..."
 * (b) "Its closest neighbors are Alpha Centauri A and B (at 0.21 light years)"
 * Are both stars at 0.21 light years, or just Alpha Centauri B?
 * [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|15px]] Done: nominator changed it to "...the Alpha Centauri binary star system (at 0.21 light years), the Sun ..."
 * (c) "if the orbital plane of the planet is inclined towards the line of sight from the Earth"
 * Clarify this: does "inclined towards" mean that the orbital plate is facing the Earth nearly edge-on?
 * [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|15px]] Done: nominator changed it to "...If the orbital plane of the planet is not perpendicular to the line of sight from the Earth then this displacement would cause ..."
 * 1) Use of jargon
 * (a) "at M5.5 it falls to the low-mass extreme of M-type stars"
 * Explain "M5.5".
 * [[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|15px]] Done: nominator clarified this
 * (b) "displays a strong emission of singly-ionized magnesium at 280 nm"
 * Explain: "at 280nm" of what?
 * [[Image:Symbol wait.svg|15px]] On hold: it was changed to "at a wavelength of 280 nm", but is not clear enough because laymen will not understand why magnesium is emitted at a certain wavelength. Does this actually refer to spectroscopy? If so, I suggest you clarify that this refers to the results of Spectrometry of the star's chromosphere, and link the the Spectroscopy article to the portion.
 * I modified the sentence to clarify what is meant. Is it okay now? Thank you for catching that.&mdash;RJH (talk) 19:18, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Once these areas are fixed, I will be happy to promote the aticle. Cheers! - Samuel  Tan  09:45, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Samuel,
 * I've modified the sentences that you identified as a problem; hopefully to your satisfaction. Thank you for reviewing the article and refining the text.&mdash;RJH (talk) 15:05, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Hey there, one final portion still needs clarification, as indicated by the purple "on hold" symbol above. - Samuel  Tan  02:48, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Passing the article: all required changes have been made, and other changes have served to improve the article. Well done! - Samuel  Tan  06:27, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you.&mdash;RJH (talk) 17:03, 2 August 2008 (UTC)