Re: GSC 00279 00321 paper

[aah@nofs.navy.mil]

Comments on the paper, pdf version:
  You know the coordinates more accurately than that (I gave
you the list); please use higher accuracy!  The Tycho-2
coordinates are what I would use, and indicate that the
coordinates are from Tycho-2.  It does make a difference,
especially when cross-referencing to other catalogs.
  I think you should include Tom as a coauthor since you
are using his data and listing the Mark IV as one of the
telescopes.  At minimum, give the location of the Mark IV
and Tom's email adr, since someone could be interested in
contacting him directly for the dataset.  I know he does not
care about authorship, but it is common courtesy unless someone
strongly objects.
  Ic is not properly subscripted; example is "11.44 in I_".
  You do not refer to your references.
  You say "unfiltered variance between 11.36 and 12.00"; again,
you need to specifically indicate that this is unfiltered with
V-band zeropoint,  in the text of the paper as well as on the figure,
and define the term CV.
  In fact, I have problems with all of the magnitudes listed for
the photometry.  First, I would use the TASS-derived V magnitudes
for the comp stars rather than their GSC values.  If you are going
to continue using the GSC values, you need to investigate at minimum
whether the GSC is on the V-band system in this field.  Second, I
am not positive where Dirk's photometry is on these plots.  Certainly
Dirk's photometry is not "CV", so at minimum I would use different
colors or symbols for his data if it does appear somewhere.
  I am willing to bet that the editor/referee will ask how the
V,Ic magnitudes are calculated (especially the zeropoints)
for the TASS camera data.  You should be prepared to answer that question.
  Getting closer!
Arne