Talk:SN 2003fg

Astronomy: Astronomical objects Start‑class High‑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
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-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 Start‑class 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
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Oasis song

Was this named after that 1995 Oasis song? -Rolypolyman 18:15, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Consistency

Why is the article called Champagne Supernova but the article refers to the event by the other name? Jamie|C 14:04, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Intro and organistion

This article needs cleaning up, particuarly it needs a non-technical intro and it needs reorganising to be logical. As an example it currently mentions that the mass of it progenitor (whatever that is) is unusual, and gives a figure for what is normal but doesn't give you any detail on this event's figures until much later.

I get the impression most of the information is in the article, somwhere, but it just needs structure and logical organisation. Thryduulf 01:53, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Naming Convention

The title's needlessly confusing and misleading. Astronomer's do not refer to this supernova as the "champagne supernova" -- that is a nickname, used in the title of a news-and-views article. The article should be titled SNLS-03d3bb or SN 2003fg (which conforms to the IAU designation convention used for other articles on particular supernovae).

I agree, the section of Nature this title comes from is a summary for non-Astronomers. The name used in academic papers is either SN2003fg or SNLS-03d3bb, of which the former is probably a better choice for this article name as it conforms to the naming convention set by other supernovae (SN 1987A for example). Further, this will avoid a confusion with the song. --Falcorian ^(talk) 00:06, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Because no one has opposed the move over a few months, nor again when I sent people some messages, I've moved it. --Falcorian ^(talk) 01:47, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

POV Flag

The neutrality of the article is dubious at best. Sentences like "It may potentially revolutionize thinking about the physics of supernovae" sound very point-of-view and they should be reworked into more neutral wording. I, however, have no idea how to rephrase them. CielProfond (talk) 23:33, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why not use something along the lines of "The supernova defies the Chandrasekhar Limit, provoking speculation as to the authenticity of the supernovae theory." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Astroch3mist (talk • contribs) 02:46, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Astroch3mist's sentence is also more informative to people such as myself, who are not entirely versed in the subject.96.53.24.86 (talk) 01:40, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Who were the "researchers from the University of Toronto"? Can the original documents announcing this discovery please be added to the references? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.68.81.166 (talk) 03:50, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]