Talk:PSR B1828−11

Astronomy: Astronomical objects 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.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Astronomical objects, which collaborates on articles related to astronomical objects.

‹See TfM›

Physics Low‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Quark Planet?

A quark planet? Really? I'm afraid I'm skeptical on that count.

In order for quark degeneracy (which is still a theoretical concept) to occur, you require an extremely high density. I don't believe any planetary mass object would be capable of attaining and maintaining such a density. It's still quite likely that this planets composition may be very different to those known to us, but this would be due to it being born in a supernova.

Any thoughts? --InvaderXan (talk) 10:52, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 02 July 2014

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. Jenks24 (talk) 07:45, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

PSR B1828-10 → PSR B1828-11 – The list of articles in SIMBAD [1] shows that the designation PSR B1828-11 is more frequently-used than the PSR B1828-10 designation. 77.57.25.250 (talk) 22:09, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

Support per WP:COMMONNAME, which tells us to use the name that is most recognizable. In this case, that would be the -11 name. StringTheory11 (t • c) 22:56, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Any additional comments:

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Orbitbox

The PSR B1828−11 planetary system
Companion (in order from star)	Mass	Semimajor axis (AU)	Orbital period (days)	Eccentricity	Inclination	Radius
A (unconfirmed)	3 M_🜨	0.93	384.3649	0	—	—
B (unconfirmed)	12 M_🜨	1.32	493.077375	—	—	—
C (unconfirmed)	8 M_🜨	—	—	—	—	—

The PSR B1828−11 planetary system
Companion (in order from star)	Mass	Semimajor axis (AU)	Orbital period (days)	Eccentricity	Inclination	Radius
b (unconfirmed)	≥0.0019 M_🜨	?	?	?	—	—

Why have the above orbitboxes above been removed? 🪐Kepler-1229b | talk | contribs🪐 19:33, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The first because the planets were disproven, as the article states; the second I don't know. SevenSpheresCelestia (talk) 20:16, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]