Talk:Type Ib and Ic supernovae

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Type Ib and Ic supernovae has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Good topic star Type Ib and Ic supernovae is part of the Classes of supernovae series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Article milestones
Date Process Result
September 8, 2008 Peer review Reviewed
October 23, 2008 Good article nominee Listed
November 3, 2008 Good topic candidate Promoted
Current status: Good article
WikiProject Astronomy / Astronomical objects  (Rated GA-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon Type Ib and Ic supernovae is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Astronomical objects, which collaborates on articles related to astronomical objects.
 
WikiProject Physics (Rated GA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Type Ib and Ic supernovae/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Hi! I will be reviewing this article for GA status, and I should have the full review up soon. Dana boomer (talk) 15:13, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Everything looks good with this article, so I'm passing it to GA status. Nice work! Dana boomer (talk) 15:52, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

As per Talk:Type II supernova#SNII = core-collapse? I contest the GA status. Both this article and Type II supernova gravely confuses supernovae as defined per observation criteria (type Ia, Ib, Ic, and II) with physical mechanisms, such as core collapse supernova versus "trans-chandrasekhar white dwarf supeernova" (not a term!). This article, as well as the type II supernova article describes type Ib and Ic as well as II as being defined by the core collapse. This is erroneous and misleading in extreme. Type Ia, Ib, Ic, II-L and II-R and so on are defined by light curve and spectrum. Core collapse is a theoretical model, not a defining criterion. The article needs heavy rewriting. ... said: Rursus (bork²) 15:10, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
The image is erroneous. Oxygen (O) should be above neon (Ne) and below carbon (C), as oxygen is between neon and carbon in the periodic table. Johnm307 (talk) 13:23, 18 September 2009 (UTC)