Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates/Star

pasting here as I am getting a zero byte error:

Thanks for effecting some of the changes:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy#Format states that static diagrams should be in the .png format. PS I'm happy that some of the diagrams are svg. Excellent work!
  • I'll see what I can do about converting the .gif image. There's a better image available, IMO, and I'll see if I can get the license accepted. — RJH (talk)
• About the sectioning: I can't quote a style guide off hand, but in all my work editing over the years, I have come across the rule that to have a sub section, you must have at least two subsections. The text before the first subsection becomes the overview of the following sections. Take a look at any printer manual or magazine article.
• Unfortunately the FA guidelines require completeness, and this is a large topic – sadly, most FAC editors get stuck with this point. See #4 of WP:WIAFA. (staying focused on the main topic without going into unnecessary detail).
  • By moving extraneous content here to the sub article, and summarizing that content here, you can get the daughter article featured with a little extra work. It's referenced after all :)
    • I'm still somewhat reluctant about this, although I moved some of the more technical details of the evolutionary tracks to the stellar evolution page. The topic is sufficient large to fill several books. It seems almost a little too brief to me right now. — RJH (talk)
• =Radiation= & Nuclear fusion reaction – Well not all articles are the same. Roche limit for example would be more tuned for a person with a science background reading it. Afterall you need a knowedge of trignometry to calculate it. The formulae are currently essential as it is used in context, but to remove it you would have to rewrite it so that the need for the formulae is obviated.
  • None of the formulae involved trigonometry. But I moved most of the off to other pages that are more technical in nature. The nucleosynthesis entries are pretty easy to grasp, so I left them in place. — RJH (talk)
• Use − to mark out the minus sign
  • Done. — RJH (talk)
• ...to our eyes, only because it is merely 8.6 light-years away from us, while Canopus is much further away from us at 310 light-years. --> "...to the eye only because Sirius (8.6 light years) is much closer to earth than Canopus (310 light years). (Don't use our)
• Context needed for many terms. I'll give you one example: As the cloud collapses, individual Bok globules form... --> ... as the cloud collapses, dark clouds of dense dust and gas called Bok globules form...
  • That entry has already been updated, and a number of the other entries have been modified. It helps when I have another person's viewpoint, however, since I'm already a little too familiar with this material. RJH (talk)
• {Main article} clarification: The first letter of the linked article should be capitalized. (star formation --> Star formation; Stellar evolution). So that this is consistent with the usage in other articles on wikipedia. Regards.
  • Done. Thank you. — RJH (talk) 19:45, 13 October 2006 (UTC)