 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
.jpg){kind=small}
Link broken in Ref #2
missing important facts edit
Wikipedia pages for most notable stars have a nice table showing lots of facts, like RA+Dec, absolute magnitude, apparent magnitude, variability period, etc. That such a table is missing, for this important Cepheid, does not inspire confidence. -- 99.233.186.4 (talk) 21:14, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
- here's a bit of stuff to get it started [1] [2] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.233.186.4 (talk) 21:21, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
Gaia DR2 reference edit
I tried to find RS Puppis in the Gaia DR2 browser at sky.esa.int, and it's not there (bright source in nebulosity is going to be difficult for the initial processing pipeline).
The citation is just to the Gaia DR2 release paper, which does not mention 'Puppis' or 'Pup' even once. If Gaia is disagreeing with geometry at the ten-sigma level, that ought to have produced at least a short paper and we ought to cite it.
- The reference is not just to the release paper. It includes a direct link to the VizieR database entry for RS Puppis. It is also shown and linked in Simbad. Hardly ten-sigma either. More like three, not that astronomical measurements are renowned for capturing all the sources of error. Lithopsian (talk) 13:13, 19 May 2019 (UTC)