Talk:PSR B1259−63/LS 2883

Latest comment: 9 years ago by Jenks24 in topic Requested move

NOT rq-pulsar edit

This is NOT a radio quiet pulsar! See Johnston et al. 1992 http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1992ApJ...387L..37J 192.167.8.185 (talk) 10:39, 13 November 2008 (UTC)mb192.167.8.185 (talk) 10:39, 13 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Well I did fix that in the article, but my edit was reverted away, so it's still saying wrong things. 76.66.198.171 (talk) 09:33, 4 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

excised box edit

PSR B1259-63

PSR B1259-63 and SS 2883
Observation data
Epoch J2000      Equinox J2000
Constellation Crux
Right ascension 13h 02m 47.6574s
Declination -63° 50' 08.662"'
Apparent magnitude (V) 10.08
Characteristics
Spectral type B2e
U−B color index ?
B−V color index ?
Variable type None
Astrometry
Proper motion (μ) RA: -2.90 mas/yr
Dec.: -6.40 mas/yr
Absolute magnitude (MV)10.68
Distance 1.500 Light-year
Details
Mass10 M
RadiusR
LuminosityL
TemperatureK
Metallicity?
Rotation?
Age? years
Orbit
CompanionSS 2883
Period (P)3.4 yr
Semi-major axis (a)70 AU
Eccentricity (e)0
Inclination (i)
Longitude of the node (Ω)
Periastron epoch (T)0
Other designations
TYC 8997-1597-1, Hbg 757, PSR J1302-6350, ALS 2883, Hen 3-852, THA 17-8, AX J1302-638, INTREF 538, UCAC2 3710789, AAVSO 1256-63, CPD-63° 2495, LS 2883, MSX6C G304.1845-00.9916, WRAY[disambiguation needed] 15-1053, GSC 08997-01597.
Database references
SIMBADdata

I excised this starbox, because it is factually wrong in several respects. Someone needs to rebuild it. 76.66.198.171 (talk) 08:26, 4 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

This starbox conflates the properties of the B2e star with that of the pulsar. As I've been reverted, someone else will have to fix the box and the text of the article. 76.66.198.171 (talk) 09:32, 4 January 2009 (UTC)Reply
My problem was not with removing incorrect information from the starbox, my problem was that you removed the entire starbox. I don't have a problem with you removing one piece of information from that box if you believe it's wrong, but I don't think that one wrong piece of information justifies deletion of the whole starbox. Matt (talk) 22:59, 4 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

Requested move edit

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. Jenks24 (talk) 11:02, 14 July 2014 (UTC)Reply



PSR B1259-63PSR B1259-63/LS 2883 – Much of the study of this pulsar is in relation to how it interacts with the Be star LS 2883 over the course of the binary orbit. It therefore seems to me that it would make most sense to change this article's scope to the binary system as a whole rather than just the pulsar. The combined designation is attested from the titles of multiple papers listed on SIMBAD for this system [1]. A possible alternative title would be PSR B1259-63/SS 2883: this appears to have been the original form of the designation and therefore "wins" on a simplistic count of number of usages, though the paper titles indicate that the LS form has been more frequently-used than the SS form since the first appearance of the LS form in 2011. 77.57.25.250 (talk) 08:22, 5 July 2014 (UTC)Reply

  • Comment MOS:SLASH/WP:SUBPAGE -- we should avoid slashes (which make articles look like subpages) if possible. What if you use "and" or "&" instead? -- 65.94.171.126 (talk) 06:29, 6 July 2014 (UTC)Reply
  • Support move and use of slash. Slash makes more intuitive sense in this case, since they are in the same system and not just a naked-eye double. StringTheory11 (t • c) 15:15, 6 July 2014 (UTC)Reply
  • Support move and use of slash - system is notable and best discussed as a unit. Each object is part of it and thus the slash is part of the most accurate title. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:43, 11 July 2014 (UTC)Reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.