Welcome to CoronalMassAffection's talk page. I will generally respond here to comments that are posted here, rather than replying via your talk page (or the article's talk page, if you are writing to me here about an article), so you may want to watch this page until you are responded to, or let me know where specifically you'd prefer the reply. |
This user does not mind criticism. Feel free to let them know if they did something wrong. |
Archives: | |
2021, 2022, 2023, 2024 |
|
Hi there, I think that this page could use an update and hoped that maybe you could help as I am quite entrenched in this topic at the moment and do not really know how deep is deep enough/too deep. So I summarize some key points and sources below which I think should be there. As far as I know there are no public domain images of them, but I have a student working on this topic who is finishing her thesis, and we will share some of those images once it is out.
This is the kind of holy grail paper: https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013JPhCS.440a2007R/abstract
Key points:
https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1956Obs....76..241S/abstract They are also known as IRIS bombs when discussed in the magnesium h&k lines, as those are observed in the IRIS satelite, after https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014Sci...346C.315P/abstract.
This one again: https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013JPhCS.440a2007R/abstract
Synethos ( talk) 15:22, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
Hey again @ Synethos: I definitely agree that there is a lot to be improved. Regarding surges, I recently created the Solar jet stub article which I intend to have cover jet-like phenomena such as X-ray jets, H-alpha surges, macrospicules, etc. I have thought about how they all should be handled, and I think it would be the most appropriate to have them all together in one article since they are very similar and have been covered as one phenomenon in recent literature (for example, Moore et al 2010 and Shen 2021). A quote from Shen 2021:
I think there would be a lot of overlap if there were to be separate articles, but maybe such an approach would be better. I would appreciate your thoughts on this. CoronalMassAffection ( talk) 15:00, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
Hi, another topic that could use a little polish I think is limb darkening. I think that this figure from my paper would be nice to have there. https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023A%26A...672L...6P/abstract
Together with an explanation of mu, which is the cosine of the emission angle with respect to the observer. https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/questions/40656/how-to-calculate-the-limb-darkening-mu-value#:~:text=Mu%20will%20be%201%20if,used%20to%20describe%20limb%20darkening. It is defined as , with rho simply being the radial distance to the calculated point, given in the same units as the radius.
In this paper I show that the limb darkening of spectral lines is different than that of the continuum, varying strongly depending on if it is chromospheric or not, and if it is in LTE or not. https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023A%26A...671A.130P/abstract
Limb darkening is also a crucial paramater in the calculation of exoplanet transits, which is why this kind of research on the Sun can help with modeling of other stars, and even planets. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/261636043_Transiting_Planets_Orbiting_Source_Stars_in_Microlensing_Events/figures?lo=1
Probably more can be said, but this would already be a good start. It would be cool if you could take a look and see if you agree with this, as it is probably not OK if I push my own papers there? Synethos ( talk) 15:46, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
Last one I promise, but since I saw you being interested in these topics specifically, and have been irked for a long time about the improper use of plage and faculae on both wiki, and in some papers. A while ago I have painstakingly assembled the definitions that you can find in the first 1.5 pages of this recently published paper. https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.527.2940C/abstract Especially the plage one would be great to see a version of on wiki, and to finally get rid of that horrible notion that plage is the same as faculae. Synethos ( talk) 15:56, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
I'm glad you like the Carrington clock I added to the wikipedia page.
If you notice another page that could use similar scripts, let me know- especially when it involves astrophysics. Blablabliam ( talk) 16:02, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
We are approaching the end of the 2024 WikiCup's second round, with a little over two weeks remaining. Currently, contestants must score at least 105 points to progress to the third round.
Our current top scorers are as follows:
Competitors may submit work for the second round until the end of 28 April, and the third round starts 1 May. Remember that only competitors with the top 32 scores will make it through to the third round. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAN, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs. As a reminder, competitors are strictly prohibited from gaming Wikipedia policies or processes to receive more points.
If you would like to learn more about rules and scoring for the 2024 WikiCup, please read Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring. Further questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges ( Cwmhiraeth ( talk · contribs), Epicgenius ( talk · contribs), and Frostly ( talk · contribs)) are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 15:05, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
The second round of the 2024 WikiCup ended on 28 April. This round was particularly competitive: each of the 32 contestants who advanced to Round 3 scored at least 141 points. This is the highest number of points required to advance to Round 3 since 2014.
The following scorers in Round 2 all scored more than 500 points:
The full scores for Round 2 can be seen here. So far this year, competitors have gotten 18 featured articles, 22 featured lists, and 186 good articles, 76 in the news credits and at least 200 did you know credits. They have conducted 165 featured article reviews, as well as 399 good article reviews and peer reviews, and have added 21 articles to featured topics and good topics.
Remember that any content promoted after 28 April but before the start of Round 3 can be claimed during Round 3, which starts on 1 May at 00:00 (UTC). Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed.
If you would like to learn more about rules and scoring for the 2024 WikiCup, please see this page. Further questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges ( Cwmhiraeth ( talk · contribs), Epicgenius ( talk · contribs), and Frostly ( talk · contribs)) are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 13:37, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
On 11 May 2024, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article May 2024 solar storms, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Step hen 09:39, 11 May 2024 (UTC)