Talk:Stellar classification

In the table of proportion of main sequence stars by spectral class, the percentages don't add up to rather more than 100%! Steve (talk) 14:47, 8 June 2023 (UTC) [reply ]

The numbers are calculated from table 2 in the given reference based on the total number of stars in each class compared to the total column. However, the number of stars in each class don't add up to the total 800. I rebased the proportions on the actual total of 824 (and a fraction). I'll expand the explanatory note to cover this. There are some other sources that could be used (eg [1]), but I haven't found a peer-reviewed one. The numbers don't end up radically different, and they actually vary quite a lot depending on how the sample is chosen. Lithopsian (talk) 15:54, 8 June 2023 (UTC) [reply ]

The classification table is wrong by a mile! According to it, Kepler-186 is ~K8, AU Microscopii is K9 or M0, Canopus is F0, 2-MASS J0523-1403 is a brown dwarf, and Kepler-442 is ~M1 by radius. Please fix! Jtadesse (talk) 17:29, 28 November 2023 (UTC) [reply ]

LBV is sometimes treated as a spectral type. Should it be added? Diamantinasaurus (talk) 12:39, 28 September 2024 (UTC) [reply ]

Again, I have noticed that the charts do not match in the temperature measurements. Could this be fixed eventually? @DVdm Youonlyliveoncehahahaahahah (talk) 13:38, 6 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

Thanks for your suggestion. When you believe an article needs improvement, please feel free to change it. We encourage you to be bold in updating pages, because wikis like ours develop faster when everybody edits. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. You can always preview your edits before you publish them or test them out in the sandbox. If you need additional help, check out our getting started page or ask the friendly folks at the Teahouse. - DVdm (talk) 15:15, 6 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

This bold edit was already made. Unfortunately, it didn't match the given references, so I've reverted it. @Unmismoobjetivo: produced the chart, so either the chart needs to change to match the reference used in this article, or the reference used for the chart needs to be identified and possibly used to support the values in the table. Ironically, the one boundary that you didn't change (class O, 33,000->30,000) could be supported by the references. Some of the other values could arguably also be supported, but some definitely contradict the refs. Lithopsian (talk) 17:03, 6 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

Thank you for looking for those mismatches. I hope to update with the chart values soon. It should be removed from the page if there are significant errors. I should learn how to make the text editable, so that anyone can fix it. I will look into it further, thank you! Unmismoobjetivo (talk) 14:24, 21 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

I don't think the numbers can really be described as errors. There are many slightly-different values for the temperatures at spectral class boundaries. The only problem is the mismatches between numbers showing in different parts of the article and the references (are there newer ones, perhaps, that we could be using?), which could be considered confusing. Lithopsian (talk) 15:32, 21 March 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

• B-Class level-4 vital articles
• Wikipedia level-4 vital articles in Physical sciences
• B-Class vital articles in Physical sciences
• B-Class Astronomy articles
• Top-importance Astronomy articles
• B-Class Astronomy articles of Top-importance
• B-Class Astronomical objects articles
• Pages within the scope of WikiProject Astronomical objects (WP Astronomy Banner)

• All Wikipedia vital articles