# Talk:Neutron stars in fiction

This review is transcluded from Talk:Neutron stars in fiction/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: TompaDompa (talk · contribs) 01:07, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: Sir MemeGod (talk · contribs) 16:01, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi, I will be reviewing this! I am relatively new to GA reviewing, so a before-hand apology as I may mess something up. :)  SirMemeGod  16:01, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
Thank you. TompaDompa (talk) 02:55, 26 September 2024 (UTC)


### Opening remarks
Okay! So overall, the article looks really good. There's a bit that needs done, so let's just start with the first paragraph (the "Background" section). 

When a star runs out of fuel available for nuclear fusion in its core, it undergoes gravitational collapse as there is no longer sufficient outward pressure to counteract the inward force of gravity. For stars similar to the Sun in mass, this produces a dense stellar remnant known as a white dwarf, but for more massive stars it instead results in a supernova explosion.I see a lot of refs citing those few sentences ([1], [2], [3], [4] and [5]). Since they all verify the same information, I would suggest cutting down a few of them, so for example, only using [1] and [2] to verify that information, or just using [2]. While having a lot of sources is usually good, it can lead to clutter (WP:INLINECLUTTER).
The same thing goes for all of the other end-of-sentence citations in the paragraph. I'd just suggest using one or two citations to verify information.

Ping me when you're finished! :)  SirMemeGod  13:22, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

I could perhaps reduce the number of sources in some instances, but the reason multiple sources are cited for each sentence tends to be that they verify slightly different information. For the sentence The resulting degenerate matter consisting entirely of neutrons in close proximity to each other—neutronium—has a density on the order of trillions times that of ordinary matter, and millions times that of a white dwarf., for instance, there are four sources cited of which one verifies "trillions times that of ordinary matter" and another "millions times that of a white dwarf", whereas neither of the other two sources verifies either comparison. I prefer putting the sources at the end of the sentence in cases like this rather than in the middle of the sentence after the specific point that particular source verifies, and this leads to a cluster of sources at the end of the sentence (this is a point I've elaborated upon before). At any rate, this is not part of the WP:Good article criteria. TompaDompa (talk) 21:20, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
Ah, I must have missed that. I honestly can't think of anything more that needs done then! That was pretty much the only thing that I had saw by-paragraph. I'll run the table:

Overall: Good job, passed with no issues.  SirMemeGod  21:37, 26 September 2024 (UTC)