Talk:Kepler-10

Kepler-10 has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Kepler-10 is the main article in the Kepler-10 series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
March 15, 2011	Good article nominee	Listed
October 11, 2011	Good topic candidate	Promoted

Current status: Good article

Merger proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Closed discussion. Articles merged. Icalanise (talk) 23:15, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I propose to merge KOI-72.02 into this page. The current consensus suggests that unconfirmed planet candidates are not sufficiently notable to warrant their own articles, (e.g. the result of the deletion discussion for the article KOI 701.03 and previous consensus at WP:ASTRO). Icalanise (talk) 09:20, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Kepler-10/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Pyrotec (talk) 09:30, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I will review. Pyrotec (talk) 09:30, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Overall summary

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:
Well referenced.

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
Well referenced.

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

I'm awarding this article GA-status. Congratulations on producing an informative article at GA-level. Pyrotec (talk) 12:36, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kepler-10. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110121143507/http://exoplanet.eu/star.php?st=Kepler-10 to http://www.exoplanet.eu/star.php?st=Kepler-10

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:24, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Milky Way

With distance 564 ly from us, I think Kepler-10 still belong to Orion Arm. Newone (talk) 03:41, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Distance to Kepler-10

This article says it is 187 parsecs/608 light years away in the first sentence and in the astrometry sidebar, but further down the article, it says:

Kepler-10 is located at a distance of 173 (± 27) parsecs from the Earth, which equates to approximately 564 light years.

I assume the first figure is more recent, but can someone confirm? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.83.120.173 (talk) 03:03, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]