Talk:WikiJournal of Science/Submissions/Astronomical spectroscopy

From Wikiversity
Jump to navigation Jump to search

From v:Talk:WikiJournal of Science/Submissions/Astronomical spectroscopy:

I like this article for an introductory astronomy course for non-science majors. Does anybody agree?--Guy vandegrift (discusscontribs) 17:24, 2 February 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

First review[edit source]

It's generally good! A non-science major may not know that frequency is the reciprocal of wavelength. Maybe sticking to wavelength throughout would be clearer. The article promises to discuss temperature, chemical composition, motion, stars, interstellar nebulae, galaxies and solar system objects and delivers! It also mentions radio intensity is used to measure density, distance is by Hubble flow, and mass is partly by peculiar motion. Okay! Some shortcomings are infrared and ultraviolet are studied spectroscopically by ground-based telescopes like the Keck in Hawaii is left out. Ultraviolet radiation is only mentioned once. X-ray spectroscopy refers to the w:X-ray astronomy article which does not mention X-ray spectroscopy. The only other mention of X-rays is off comets describing more the Sun than the comet. Might consider leaving X-rays and ultraviolets out of article. --Marshallsumter (discusscontribs) 08:49, 25 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I recommend against publication until these concerns are appropriately addressed. --Marshallsumter (discusscontribs) 15:58, 1 May 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As an article on astronomical spectroscopy a reader is likely expecting sections on each major band including gamma rays, X-rays, ultraviolets, infrareds, submillimeters, and microwaves. --Marshallsumter (discusscontribs) 22:40, 6 May 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Radiation astronomy/Spectroscopy contains examples of various types of astronomical spectroscopy that may be included in this article. Commons category c:Astronomical spectroscopy contains examples of many of these that could be included with different emphases. It's up to the authors to decide what they want to do. --Marshallsumter (discusscontribs) 16:04, 26 May 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
w:User:Aldebarium appears to have the necessary and sufficient background as well as interest in the article to respond to the reviews. --Marshallsumter (discusscontribs) 04:39, 7 June 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
See Comments from Modest Genius and address. --Marshallsumter (discusscontribs) 02:22, 25 June 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]