Template talk:Star formation

Older talk
Proposal for new template listing: - pre-main sequence
 * Star Formation Regions
 * HII region
 * Solar Nebula
 * Classes of Objects
 * Bok globule / Cometary globule
 * Young stellar object
 * Protostar
 * T Tauri star
 * Classical T Tauri star
 * Weak line T Tauri star
 * Herbig Ae/Be star
 * Herbig-Haro object
 * Zero age main sequence star
 * Theoretical Concepts
 * Initial mass fuction
 * Jeans instability
 * Kelvin-Helmholtz mechanism

CarpD said that, I believe. Rursus 22:45, 5 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Three objections to this proposal (which otherwise is good):
 * a wiki nav template shouldn't link outside like the links Bok globule / Cometary globule do, but the original template contains in-wiki links,
 * Protostar isn't a class of objects, it's a theoretical concept, more specifically a theoretical model that happens to be fairly well supported by observations,
 * the same thing regards HII regions vs. Solar Nebula, HII regions are actually observed objects, while the Solar Nebula is a theoretical concept.
 * Maybe:


 * }
 * }
 * }


 * ?? Rursus 23:00, 5 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I know, those were examples. In wikipedia, Cometary Globules don't exist.  Thanks, CarpD 7/04/07.

I reverted to uncollapsed
I reverted the template to the uncollapsed form from this version, where the navigation template subsections are all visible. They were changed to appear collapsed, which I didn't like as it reduced ease of navigation. See Template talk:PhysicsNavigation where I asked for a collapsed=show parameter. (also this talk page did not align fully left for some reason so I wrapped the above in a div) -Wikianon (talk) 22:10, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, this was my fault. I didn't notice your comment. I'll fixely the PhysNav. template so it wholly uncollapses when desired. (Sheliak (talk) 06:32, 5 March 2008 (UTC)).

Reorg
I just reorganized the list here... if anyone objects, please discuss here. Just a few thoughts I had on possibly tweaking it some more.... Discuss! Sailsbystars (talk) 19:39, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
 * The "objects" list seems to perhaps better correspond to "stages of star formation."
 * The nebular hypothesis seems to have a lot of overlap with the star formation article, so I don't know if we should separate it out.
 * The interstellar medium isn't a single object, per se, so it's a bit of an oddball....but would make sense as a "stage of star formation"