Misplaced Pages

:Featured article candidates/Scattered disc - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Serendipodous (talk | contribs) at 07:07, 29 August 2008. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 07:07, 29 August 2008 by Serendipodous (talk | contribs)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Scattered disc

Nominator(s):--Lord₪Sunday, Ling.Nut , Serendious
Toolbox

I'm nominating this article for featured article status because it is an excellent article, and extremely well done. It was a Featured article team collaboration, with excellent help from uninvolved users such as Geometry guy, who gained some new experience from this article. It has pretty much been the WP Solar System focus since Oort cloud was featured, until we got sidetracked and we featured 3 other articles. I think this article is well referenced and extremely well written, after all, it is Serendipodous! --Lord₪Sunday 19:55, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

LordSunday already has two a FAC running that requires substantial attention to unresolved issues; unless Ling.Nut is prepared to take primary and substantial responsibility for this FAC, it should be withdrawn. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:01, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Um, two noms? i have one that is a co-nom, but then whatever, let Serendipodous take it over then. --Lord₪Sunday 20:03, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Corrected, one (name confusion); at any rate, the issues are substantial and unaddressed, so you shouldn't be adding another nomination, particularly at a time when some of the nominations that you have put up are stretching resources. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:08, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Well, apologies Sandy, but I didn't really want to nominate that. It was really Editorofthewiki's doing, I don't want to pass the baton to Serendipodous but I think he'll do better anyway. --Lord₪Sunday 21:50, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Um, OK. I'll handle it. Serendious 20:05, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
That's better; I don't see any indication that Ling.Nut is aware. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:21, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Comment I've been using the toolbox, and got through the dablinks (all fixed now :) ), but the external link to uchicago.edu (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/full/10.1086/338692) turns up "The requested article is not currently available on this site." Can this be corrected somehow? {{Nihiltres|talk|log}} 22:53, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments

  • 'This makes scattered objects "among the most distant and cold objects in the Solar System". - why is this in quotes? If it's in quotes because it's a quote (which seems rather apparent), why would a quote be necessary or appropriate here?
    i believe Serendipodous was going to state this himself, but this quote is fine, it follows what the lead is about, summarizing the article. --Lord₪Sunday 01:35, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
  • "Eris, the largest dwarf planet in the Solar System, lies within the scattered disc." - This sentence feels random; it doesn't seem important enough to mention in the lead, and it interrupts the flow.
    Heh. I never liked that sentence. Added "somehwere", it seems like it has better flow to me. --Lord₪Sunday 01:37, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
  • "Due to its unstable nature, astronomers now consider the scattered disc to be the place of origin for most periodic comets observed in the Solar System, with the centaurs, a population of icy bodies between Jupiter and Neptune, being the intermediate stage in an object's migration from the disc to the inner Solar System, where perturbations from the giant planets will send it close to Earth, transforming it into a periodic comet." - this sentence needs to be broken up.
    done. --Lord₪Sunday 01:38, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
  • "cleared out over the age of the Solar System..." - over the "age"? How about over the "history"?
    chaged to growth. --Lord₪Sunday 01:49, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
  • "Indeed, some objects, like (29981) 1999 TD10" - better phrased as "Objects such as (29981) 1999 TD10".
    Changed to however. --Lord₪Sunday 01:49, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
  • "While" should generally not be used to indicate a contradiction between two statements. Other words ("but", "though") work equally well, and have no secondary connotation.

I haven't read the entire article yet, but the prose in general looks fairly good. I'm inclined to support. Nousernamesleft (talk) 00:53, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

I've emailed Mike Brown about it, but knowing his schedule, I don't think I'll get a response for a while. Serendious 07:07, 29 August 2008 (UTC)