Talk:Habitability of K-type main-sequence star systems

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Habitability of K-type main-sequence star systems article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Articles for creation

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This article was accepted on 26 April 2012 by reviewer Joemeng967 (talk · contribs).

Astronomy Low‑importance

	Astronomy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.AstronomyWikipedia:WikiProject AstronomyTemplate:WikiProject AstronomyAstronomy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

I removed reference to research suggesting stars within 0.8 AUs would likely get their atmospheres stripped, since it referred to planets circling a particular red dwarf star which was in a trinary system with two K type stars rather than planets orbiting a K-type star.AJBurn (talk) 02:17, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Confusing/unclear point, and a paywalled source.

First paragraph, third sentence: "These stars are known as "Goldilocks stars" and they emit enough radiation in the non-UV ray spectrum[2] to provide a temperature that allows liquid water to exist on the surface of a planet orbiting around a K-type main-sequence star in the habitable zone." I may be the confused one here, but I thought "enough radiation...that allows liquid water to exist on the surface of a planet..." was part of the definition of "habitable zone" - regardless of what type of star (such as Earth and The Sun). Further, the source is paywalled. Rather than try to change it myself and make things worse, I'm choosing to note the issue here, instead. 47.185.98.94 (talk) 02:51, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That's a very interesting point. I'll try to remember to look into this, hopefully find the original source. But you're right, it is kind of odd phrasing. Primefac (talk) 12:03, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Feedback is always appreciated. Primefac (talk) 12:32, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]