| | |  | This is the Conversation Forum for Uranus << Peer Review: A49829665 - Uranus - UPDATE for A396713 yipes, stripes >> |  |
 |  |  | Subject: A12186092 - Uranus Posted Jun 7, 2006 by J'au-æmne This is a reply to this Posting
|  | Posting
10
  |  | Hiya, I'm on holiday this week and haven't had much 'net access, so apologies for being slow to get to this thread!
I like what you've done
The few things I'd change on the new version are: 1. First line - you got rid of saying it's a gas giant, which, Imo, leaves that sentence unbalanced. I know it's repeated later on, but can that go back?
2. "As d2k progressed..." - I've never heard it called that before! Is this a standard way of refering to this decade? I've not seen it on the edited guide before, but then again I've not been reading much recently. There's something about that sentence that seems a little awkward to me, maybe because we're still in this decade but it refers to it in the past tense.
3. You could put a footnote to describe what adaptive optics is. Although actually, I think it would merit it's own entry...
4. In the Rings and Satellites section, instead of "At the time this article was updated" you could have "As of 2006", which would avoid the extra footnote (although detractors may point out it is a little wikepedian )
Oh yeah, and you also didn't capitalise Voyager 2 once in the planet section (nitpicky? moi? )
Other than that, great job It's good to see stuff being updated, it was such a long time since I originally wrote this!
|
 |  |  | Subject: A12186092 - Uranus Posted Jun 7, 2006 by shagbark This is a reply to this Posting
|  | Posting
11
  |  | d2k is my own contribution to the english language. Just as y2k was the first year of this millenia so is d2k the first decade. this avoids using terms like " the naughts" or this decade (which we can't use anyway because articles are supposed to be time neutral not saying things like during the past year.) I can make the other changes you suggest and I am hoping to get a link to an article on William Herschel that is currently languishing in Peer Review.
|
|
| 
   
   
Conversation list
|