Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Triangulum Australe/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by GrahamColm 22:16, 7 November 2012.

Triangulum Australe

 * Nominator(s): Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:22, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured article because I've done all I can to it, and had help from the Good article process and then some Peer Review feedback. It is short and sweet, and I've put in it just about everything I've found. I have a nagging concern about the listiness of constellation articles so am happy to hear prose tweaks. Have at it. Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:22, 23 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Note: This is a WikiCup nomination. The following nominators are WikiCup participants: Casliber. To the nominator: if you do not intend to submit this article at the WikiCup, feel free to remove this notice. UcuchaBot (talk) 00:01, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Comments - nice article, some minor points (Done)
 * Lead "...[deep sky objects] are not prominent." - wiki-link, hyphen deep-sky objects?
 * done Casliber (talk · contribs) 09:57, 24 October 2012 (UTC)


 * "[Other] notable features include ..." - The preceding sentence is already about "deep-sky objects", so clusters and nebulas are not "Other" notable features.
 * good point. removed. Casliber (talk · contribs) 09:57, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
 * fixed first 2 points, an edit was probably lost along the way. GermanJoe (talk) 11:12, 24 October 2012 (UTC)


 * history "...a catalogue for his patron king Manuel I of Portugal, which is now lost. In 1504, he had published his work Mundus Novus" - a bit unclear (for me), was the catalogue called "Mundus Novus" or are those two separate works?
 * two separate works. I didn't want to digress too much into this story, but added a bit more to clarify it. Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:46, 24 October 2012 (UTC)


 * wiki-link "Jacob Floris van Langren" and "Houtman" (if one of the Houtmans on the DAB-page is the correct one, not sure).
 * linked Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:05, 24 October 2012 (UTC)


 * "Petrus Keyser" - wiki-link "Pieter Dirkszoon Keyser" (if it's the same guy?).
 * linked Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:05, 24 October 2012 (UTC)


 * If mentioned persons are not astronomers, briefly add their profession or other important qualifiers (f.e. "cartographer Jacob Floris van Langren").
 * added professions. Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:05, 24 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Characteristics "The [recommended] three-letter abbreviation for the constellation ... " - i'd remove "recommended", as the IAU appears to be commonly recognized as de-facto naming authority.
 * good point - there were some two and four letter variants early but I agree these are universal and uncontested now. removed. Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:05, 24 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Notable features "It consists of a white dwarf and a donor star which [orbit each other] every 1.5 hours." - Technically they don't orbit "each other", but maybe that's too nitpicky (feel free to ignore).
 * Technically they orbit a common centre of gravity, but that comes over a bit wordy for this...happy to consider succinct alternatives...is it too wordy? hmmm. Casliber (talk · contribs)
 * no worries, was just nitpicking for the sake of it. The short version should be close enough for a summary text. GermanJoe (talk) 11:12, 24 October 2012 (UTC)


 * "Triangulum Australe lies within the Milky Way, so has many stars, yet is not well represented with deep sky objects—one open cluster and a few planetary nebulae and faint galaxies." - that sentence structure looks odd, several short stubby clauses where the flow could use improvement. "Well represented" sounds odd for a constellation. Some thoughts: The info "it lies within the Milky Way" probably would fit better in the general characteristics and location info. Maybe start the para with "Triangulum Australe has many stars, but only a few notable deep-sky objects." No need to list them, this info follows with the next sentences anyway.
 * tried rejigging the bit and placing Milky Way sentence in characteristics. I think it works. Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:19, 24 October 2012 (UTC)


 * I agree with your concern about a lot of listy data, but besides some minor prose-tweaks i don't see how to avoid this situation. You can't add a lot more narrative detail without blowing up the article's length and the mentioned facts seem all notable enough. GermanJoe (talk) 09:21, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
 * All I can think of to make the listiness less listy is highlighting the most interesting tidbits a bit....just not sure if any more are needed. Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:40, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
 * All Done, thanks - except the catalogue <-> Mundus Novus question, could you check please? GermanJoe (talk) 11:12, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Did some more minor copy-edits to avoid repetitions and added a few wiki-links, diff is []. GermanJoe (talk) 21:07, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Looks fine. Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:52, 25 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Support, very neatly written and though I'm not an expert in the field is seems both historically and technically informative. I took the liberty of copyediting a few things, nothing critical though so feel free to revert anything if you don't care for my changes. Cheers, · Andonic  contact 02:48, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
 * changes look ok - thanks for the support! Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Image check all (both) images are OK. GermanJoe (talk) 09:36, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Support - (did some very minor ce) The general information appears comprehensive, sourced and well-written (for an article with a lot of data). A few quick source checks showed no issues. Two remaining minor points:
 * "HD 147018 is a sun-like star of apparent magnitude 8.3 and spectral type G9V,[28] which was found to have two exoplanets, HD 147018 b and HD 147018 c, in 2009.[29]" - Is HD 147018 the third star of the previously described Iota Trianguli Australis or is it a new separate object? Could be made a little bit clearer.
 * agree. just trying to get some info on the fainter star of iota to put in...but that is proving tricky to find to add.... Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:07, 29 October 2012 (UTC)


 * The article still has several "X is ...", "Y is ..." sentences. I realize, some of them are unavoidable, but if you could find a few more spots for rephrasing, it would help to improve the prose flow. GermanJoe (talk) 09:36, 29 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Support Comments from Jim Good work, but some comments . Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  15:06, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
 * orange giant, celestial globe, Arcmin, optical double, spiral galaxy &mdash; links please
 * Unfortunately orange giant  just redirects to  giant star, so I linked to  bright giant . Others linked Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:08, 30 October 2012 (UTC)
 * He grew to recognize the stars in the southern hemisphere  &mdash; learned to recognise  probably more normal
 * done Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:59, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
 *  A-type main sequence star and A-type main sequence dwarf &mdash; seems a bit odd that these go to completely different articles
 * aligned now Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:06, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
 * A9IV/V &mdash; this and similar are pretty impenetrable, you have to read most of the spectral types article. If you are going to keep them, I suggest pointing to the Yerkes subsection instead
 * I've de-linked that as better links elsewhere Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:34, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
 *  C2, CH and CN &mdash; I have a chemistry degree, most of your readers will not. A bit of help here would be good
 * I've blue-linked them. The names won't mean anything unless the reader reads the target article. if you can think of a few words that might help then that might be good. Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:28, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
 * perhaps of molecular fragments C2, CH and CN, but with the blue links I don't mind if left as is  Jimfbleak  -  talk to me?  07:21, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah I like that - was wondering whether just molecules  was sufficient but this is exacter Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:05, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Light years &mdash; some, but not all, have parsec conversions, need consistency
 * added. Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:28, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Mennickent, Ronald E.; Arenas, Jose  &mdash; format ref
 * no idea what happened there....but fixed now Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:15, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Photoelectric photometric Catalogue of homogeneous measurements in the UBV System &mdash; should "Catalogue" be lc?
 * dang. meant to do all titles in Title Case... Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:10, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
 * You give publisher locations for some, but not all, books
 * added. Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:05, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
 * please write US states in full in refs
 * added. Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:28, 31 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Looking good, I'll be happy to support once the outstanding minor items are fixed  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  07:21, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Great, changed to support above  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  09:01, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
 * great/thanks. Casliber (talk · contribs) 18:08, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

More ref comments
 * FN2 and similar should be endash
 * tweaked Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:15, 5 November 2012 (UTC)


 * FN4: page?
 * added Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:36, 5 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Schaaf ISBN returns error, please check
 * fixed Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:36, 5 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Ségransan: why is there a date in the middle of an author list? Nikkimaria (talk) 04:09, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
 * bleh, no idea - fixed now anyway. Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:36, 5 November 2012 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.