Comments:Astronomers discover largest star on record
This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. Please remain on topic and avoid offensive or inflammatory comments where possible. Try thought-provoking, insightful, or controversial. Civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.
Use the "Start a new discussion" button just below to start a new discussion. If the button isn't there, wait a few seconds and click this link: Refresh.
Contents
| Thread title | Replies | Last modified |
|---|---|---|
| "most massive", not "largest" | 1 | 23:58, 28 January 2019 |
| Comments from feedback form - "everything thats important is ..." | 0 | 21:05, 7 June 2011 |
| Comments from feedback form - "nice work. thanks" | 0 | 15:54, 1 August 2010 |
| Comments from feedback form - "This isn't the largest star, i..." | 1 | 00:50, 29 July 2010 |
| Comments from feedback form - "Its interesting" | 0 | 01:37, 25 July 2010 |
| Comments from feedback form - "to whom it may concern: why ca..." | 1 | 09:36, 25 July 2010 |
| Comments from feedback form - "Very clear explanations, nice ..." | 0 | 12:16, 23 July 2010 |
R136a1 os the largest star by mass. Mass ia not the same as "large" (= diameter), making the title misleading; the largest stars are VV Cephei A and VY CMa. Daniel "Danny" Fenton is back (talk) 23:51, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
everything thats important is all here, i am very happy and impressed with the information..keep up the good work........
This isn't the largest star, it is the most massive. Just because the average person doesn't know the difference, doesn't mean the techical acuracy of the article should suffer.
Well that may be... but i don't think you should be insulting the intellect of everyone when you can't spell accuracy (as well as technical). So it may be that the article shouldn't suffer. Your feedback... well has, but even if you know how to spell accuracy or technical and you just happen not to catch it. It just means your method for feedback is less then efficient. Have a nice day and be kind ;) emoticons
Its interesting
to whom it may concern: why cant i share this report via email since i only use email and refuse to be coerced into using facebook. willa bluesky july 24/10
Very clear explanations, nice pictures, everything I wanted to know is present and it's not too complicated. sources are cited