The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by 97198 (talk) 06:10, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

• ... that the star S Coronae Borealis has been estimated as having around 1.34 times the Sun's mass but 308 times its radius? Takeuti, Mine; Nakagawa, Akiharu; Kurayama, Tomoharu; Honma, Mareki (2013). "A Method to Estimate the Masses of Asymptotic Giant Branch Variable Stars". Publications of the Astronomical Society of Japan. 65 (3): 60. Bibcode:2013PASJ...65...60T. doi:10.1093/pasj/65.3.60.

• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Typhoon Caitlin (1991)

5x expanded by Lithopsian (talk) and Casliber (talk). Nominated by Casliber (talk) at 02:56, 2 August 2017 (UTC).

• Article has not be expanded fivefold in the last ten days, and falls short of the 1,500 character DYK minimum. You need some more words. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:48, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

• It has now. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 23:46, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
  • New enough, long enough, fully referenced. Help me out here. I'm seeing 0.128 ± 0.13 M_⊙ for the mass, and log (R/R_⊙)of 2.489 ± 0.043 which makes R/R_⊙ = 12 not 308. Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:16, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
    • You lost me. log (R/R_⊙)of 2.489 expands to 308 R_☉ (=10^2.489). A pulsation range is also shown from an older reference. Log(M/M_☉) yields 1.34 M_☉ (=10^0.128) which is what is in the starbox. Is the mass log throwing you off? It isn't common, but the paper makes it clear it is a log, and 1.34 M_☉ is about what it should be. Or are you doing natural logarithms? Lithopsian (talk) 14:00, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
      • Yeah, I am used to always using natural logarithms. Good to go. Hawkeye7 (talk) 23:34, 8 August 2017 (UTC)