Talk:Nova (astronomy): Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Chris Day
imported>Tomas Kindahl
No edit summary
Line 8: Line 8:


Yes, exactly.  It's a perfect example of a beneficial side-effect of better-coordinated information. --[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] 15:16, 8 May 2008 (CDT)
Yes, exactly.  It's a perfect example of a beneficial side-effect of better-coordinated information. --[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] 15:16, 8 May 2008 (CDT)
::Returning to Larrys question, I think there should be a separate article for Supernova, since it is nowadays considered too distinct from an ordinary nova to be treated in-depth in the same context. Maybe I'll do it later. [[User:Tomas Kindahl|Tomas Kindahl]] 18:58, 15 July 2010 (UTC)


==Test of name specificity==
==Test of name specificity==
<nowiki>{{r|Nova (astronomy)}}</nowiki> is seen as: {{r|Nova (astronomy)}}
<nowiki>{{r|Nova (astronomy)}}</nowiki> is seen as: {{r|Nova (astronomy)}}
<nowiki>{{r|Nova (astronomy)|Nova}}</nowiki> is seen as: {{r|Nova (astronomy)|Nova}}
<nowiki>{{r|Nova (astronomy)|Nova}}</nowiki> is seen as: {{r|Nova (astronomy)|Nova}}

Revision as of 12:58, 15 July 2010

This article is developing and not approved.
 Main Article
 Discussion
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
 
To learn how to update the categories for this article, see here. To update categories, edit the metadata template.
 Definition:  Variable star in the class of cataclysmic variable stars, which is normally very faint but occasionally erupts in an immense explosion, increasing its brightness a thousand to tens of millions of times; similar but unrelated to supernovae. [d] [e]
Checklist and Archives
 Workgroup category:  Astronomy [Please add or review categories]
 Talk Archive:  none  English language variant:  British English

I'm not sure about redirecting supernova here. Isn't there enough distinct information about this particular type of nova for a separate article? --Larry Sanger 14:28, 8 May 2008 (CDT)

I would think so. We'll see this happen a lot at the beginning but I imagine we'll expand on these type of redirect with time. Note that in Related Atricles subpages supernova can exist with its own unique definition and it will be identified as a redirect due to the purple link. See example below using the {{r}} template (and thanks for improving the def):
  • Supernova [r]: An astronomical object exploding to a brightness similar to that of an entire galaxy. Caused by a catastrophic explosion of either a white dwarf system or an aged star about five times the size of the sun, which occurs when the star collapses; a neutron star or a black hole may be formed as a result, or the explosion results in no remaining compact object. [e]
Hopefully this distinct color will attract peoples attention to the fact that this article needs to be started when users browse the related articles subpages. Chris Day 14:38, 8 May 2008 (CDT)

Yes, exactly. It's a perfect example of a beneficial side-effect of better-coordinated information. --Larry Sanger 15:16, 8 May 2008 (CDT)

Returning to Larrys question, I think there should be a separate article for Supernova, since it is nowadays considered too distinct from an ordinary nova to be treated in-depth in the same context. Maybe I'll do it later. Tomas Kindahl 18:58, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Test of name specificity

{{r|Nova (astronomy)}} is seen as:

  • Nova (astronomy)

{{r|Nova (astronomy)|Nova}} is seen as:

  • Nova
Retrieved from "https://citizendium.org/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:Nova_(astronomy)&oldid=424392"