User talk:Lithopsian

CS1 error on SZ Crateris

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page SZ Crateris, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 18:40, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

Eight years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:19, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

Moving Draft:DR1 (star) to mainspace

Hi Lithopsian, I created the draft article Draft:DR1 (star) as you may have seen, and would like to move it to mainspace now that I added the remaining information I could find. May I ask you how to move a page when the destination is already a redirect? The Publish Now button doesn't work because of it, and Wikipedia tells me not to copy-paste the contents so as not to lose the editing history. Thanks, AluminiumWithAnI (talk) 09:13, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

I created the redirect, and then I made another edit. I think that pretty much blocks a simple move. I'll tag the redirect for speedy deletion; after that you should be able to do a simple page move. Or I can. Lithopsian (talk) 14:25, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the move, as well as the contributions to the article! AluminiumWithAnI (talk) 22:15, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

Removal Request

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeeney_AI KnowledgeCrafters (talk) 19:44, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

That seems a bit random. Did I win a prize draw or something? Lithopsian (talk) 19:52, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

New Page

The draft article titled "Draft:Vastav" on Wikipedia has been submitted for review and is currently awaiting approval. Once it passes the review process, it will be moved to the main article space. Qewse (talk) 20:32, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

Draft has been deleted and creator blocked as a sock, please disregard. Rusalkii (talk) 20:57, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

CS1 error on HD 220466

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page HD 220466, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 19:52, 1 May 2025 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

for your help with the Alcyone thing :)

Sleepycadet (talk) 03:42, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

Gaia evolutionary stages

Could you clarify how Gaia evolutionary stages are interpreted? You removed the claim that HD 32963 is on the main sequence, with the edit summary that Gaia says it's a subgiant. The Gaia DR3 VizieR record lists a value of "326" for the evolutionary stage, and according to this page anything below 360 is on the main sequence. Is that wrong? SevenSpheres (talk) 22:46, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

I think you have the right interpretation but possibly not the right data. Gaia potentially lists more than one model for a star. This is a good example. Usually there will be an entry in the paramp table, although VizieR by default does not show the evol column on the summary page; you have to click through to the full listing to see it. This is the preferred or primary model. It may be missing if the model predicts a stage beyond core helium ignition. Then there is the paramsup table that you have obviously looked at. For whatever reason, the evol column shows by default on the summary page, but don't interpret this as meaning anything. This models a different evolutionary stage in those cases where there is some ambiguity. The most common case is stars in the red clump region which may be on the horizontal branch (no entry in paramp since it is beyond helium ignition) or the red giant branch (usually in paramsup because stars in this region are generally less likely to be on the red giant branch).

In the case of HD 32963, the ambiguity may stem from whether the star is just approaching the end of its main sequence life (increasing temperature and luminosity) or just past (subgiant branch, decreasing temperature and possibly luminosity). The paramp table says it is just past, evol = 363 (start of the subgiant branch), and the paramsup table says it is just before, evol = 326 (end of the main sequence but temperature still increasing). There are some doubts about that, though: the mass is given as less than solar, so there shouldn't be a significant hook at the end of the main sequence, so there shouldn't be much ambiguity. Still, that's what the evol values say. Probably shouldn't try to be too precise about a bulk-processing model. A different source might be considered more reliable, or at least taken as confirmation of one or the other, but I didn't find a good one in a very brief search.

Just as a rule of thumb for when to look carefully, any star with a radius/luminosity higher than solar and a temperature lower is at the very least towards the end of the main sequence, possibly past it. In this case it is marginal, and the evolutionary stage is likewise borderline in either case. Spectral luminosity classes are not always reliable. In this case there are some main sequence, some subgiant, so don't clarify anything. Lithopsian (talk) 14:57, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

CS1 error on BD Camelopardalis

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page BD Camelopardalis, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A missing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 15:32, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

Please finish page moves and fix broken pages

Please see Template talk:Infobox star#Abandonware?. Thanks. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:25, 28 May 2025 (UTC)