Talk:2MASS J03480772−6022270/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Amitchell125 (talk · contribs) 16:42, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Happy to review the article.

Review

Lead section / infobox

• I would convert 29 light years (as is done elsewhere in the article). Also, about 29 light-years is too imprecise imo, considering the information in the infobox. Why not simply copy what the infobox says?

• Rapidly-rotating is redundant, as the text that follows emphasises it rate of rotation.
• Measured rotation period - I would remove 'measured' as redundant.

1 Discovery

• Link point source.
• Consider separating the links by copy editing near-infrared spectra, e.g. by saying ‘spectra in the near-infrared region of the electromagnetic spectrum’.
• I would include the information that the star was discovered by Adam Burgasser and collaborators of the 2MASS Wide-Field T Dwarf Search in the lead section.

2 Location and distance

• These celestial coordinates - just ‘These coordinates’? (minor point)

2.1 Proper motion

• The link to kinematics doesn’t lead to where you expect it to. Amend kinematics of stellar members to something like ‘kinematics of the stars’ and link this.
• Consider not having a title here, and including this small paragraph in the section above, perhaps retitles location and proper motion.

More to follow. Amitchell125 (talk) 15:38, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

3 Spectral class

• Unlink water (MOS:OL).
• Link late as it is used in a technical way here (link to Stellar_classification#"Early"_and_"late"_nomenclature).
• both of which are – ‘both of’ is imo redundant.
• Link absorption line (spectral line).

4 Physical properties

• Unlink photospheric; Earth’s gravity (duplicate links).
• The link to oblate in the caption is wrong.

4.1 Mass, radius, and age

• Is there a reason why billion years is linked?
• Consider taking out the title, as ‘Physical properties’ would include the mass, radius and age.

5.1 Photometric variability and periodicity

• Link period (Frequency).
• Amend the fastest-rotating brown dwarf confirmed to ‘the fastest-rotating brown dwarf confirmed as of 2021’.

5.2 Physical effects

• Unlink projected rotational velocity; 2MASS J1219+3128; inclination; spectral lines (duplicated links).
• significantly Doppler-broadened  - is significantly needed?
• It’s not clear to me that this image is in the public domain. It can only be used in the article if it is.
• The first paragraph requires a citation.
• The strong centrifugal forces – the sentence implies they are strong, so I don’t think strong is needed here.
• If possible split the linked words circularly polarized auroral radio (MOS:SOB).
• Being the most oblate and fastest rotating brown dwarf known, 2MASS J0348−6022 is expected to exhibit significant linear polarization in its optical and infrared thermal emission, as implied by trends in observed polarimetric properties of ultra-cool dwarfs. This sentence could doing with copy editing, perhaps into shorter sentences. I would for instance remove ‘'Being'’, as it changes the sense of the sentence in an unintended way..
• Avoid current (in Current extrapolations, (MOS:RELTIME)).
• Link fluid, as it is used in a technical sense here.
• Amend as they conserve angular momentum to ‘so as to conserve angular momentum’ (as the connection is more explicit than the text implies).
• In but no such phenomena have been observed yet, remove yet, as the information may go out of date.
• Its rapid rotation – amend to something like ‘the rapid rotation of 2MASS J0348−6022’.

8 References

• Ref 2 (Tannock et al) would easier to download if this link was included in the citation (as has been done in Ref 3).

9 External links

• Check that the external links are not better off used in the text of the article; if any of them contains nothing the article does not already have, it is not needed and should be removed. See WP:EL.

On hold

I'm putting the article on hold for a week until 6 June to allow time for the issues raised to be addressed. The article is generally in great shape. Regards, Amitchell125 (talk) 15:55, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

@Amitchell125: All suggested changes have been made, plus one title error for ref 10 that you have missed. I have checked NRAO's media use policy for File:NewBrownDawf5 rectangular crop.jpg and I can confirm that it is licensed under CC BY 3.0 Unported. I believe that this also applies for Caltech, since this image was published under that license in the Astropix website endorsed by that institution. Nrco0e (talk · contribs) 21:23, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Passing

A straightforward article to review—you made sure it was well written before nominating it, and so it passed quickly. Many thanks for the similar high quality articles you produce. Amitchell125 (talk) 06:39, 30 May 2021 (UTC)