Template:Did you know nominations/S-type star


 * The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as |this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:15, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

S-type star

 * ... that S-type stars have bands of zirconium monoxide in their spectrum?


 * Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Roya Sadat, Alka Sadat

5x expanded by Lithopsian (talk). Nominated by Casliber (talk) at 00:34, 4 July 2016 (UTC).


 * Symbol question.svg Article Erudite and well-researched, thank you for this expert-quality contribution to the encyclopedia. New enough: expansion began June 29, nominated July 4. Long enough: readable prose from 2025 B (331 words) to 17 kB (2916 words). Minor content concerns—e.g. lack of distinction between "S stars" and "S-type stars" is unclear in lede (WP:OBVIOUS), commentary on old primary sources (e.g. "not strictly correct") sometimes appears to be WP:OR—are not disqualifying. Citations well formatted. Spot checks for close paraphrasing are all clear. Mostly cited inline, but minor problem to be resolved: §Examples cites no sources. It looks like its claims can mostly be verified by citations in its wikilinked articles, although I can't find a source for Chi Cygni being the sometime brightest S-type.
 * Hook Took the liberty of removing an extra ], now formatted. Hook fact is cited (to Keenan 1954), although the next sentence (cited to Boeshaar 1979) seems to unnecessarily complicate it by implying that SC-type stars (the only ones whose definitions, in that paper, allow weak or absent ZrO) are S-type stars. Not sure how interesting it is to a general readership, but it sounds intriguing and is not too technical.
 * QPQ Good to go. FourViolas (talk) 02:53, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for looking at this. I think I've fixed all the concerns. I've also added a couple of images and perhaps one of them would be suitable to go with the hook. This is hardly bedtime reading for everyone, but the articles about individual S stars really needed a good definition to link to and particularly to explain the complex spectral type codes. Lithopsian (talk) 13:01, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Symbol question.svg Concerns addressed very well. How about the above image, cropped to show more than a dot at thumbnail size, with
 * ALT1: ... that S-type stars (pictured) have bands of zirconium monoxide in their spectrum?
 * FourViolas (talk) 16:25, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Image looks good. Lithopsian (talk) 21:56, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg Passed then. Only difference between hooks is "(pictured)". FourViolas (talk) 00:37, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Several paragraphs that don't seem to be summary introductions lack any citations, per Rule D2. Yoninah (talk) 15:17, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Yeah,, ya gotta get used to this idiot DYK rule that rigidly wants a cite at the end of each paragraph, whether or not that makes any sense.  E Eng  22:43, 8 July 2016 (UTC) or  or whoever you are.  E  Eng  22:44, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Should be done now. The only text fragments without a citation are summaries or introductions to the paragraphs that follow.  Lithopsian (talk) 23:10, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Symbol voting keep.svg Thank you, looks good. Since hook ref is offline, restoring tick with an AGF symbol. Rest of review per FourViolas. Yoninah (talk) 20:33, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg Good call on the citations; some the the paragraphs were cited to sources other than those I had assumed. But the Bibcode link for the citation shows that the abstract opens with In this survey, spectra of type S are defined as those having bands of ZrO strong enought to be detected with low dispersion; the fulltext has Let us, accordingly, define type S by...the presence of distinct bands of ZrO in the easily observable spectral regions, after noting that this is one of two formerly widely accepted criteria. FourViolas (talk) 23:16, 9 July 2016 (UTC)