Roche Limit

I've drafted an initial article on Roche Limit. Please review.

Review by Critic Carla:

The article is well-structured, maintains a professional encyclopedic tone, and accurately covers the intended topic. However, there are a few technical and organizational gaps that should be addressed to meet high-quality Wikipedia standards.

• Correct the Rigid Body Formula: The formula provided for the rigid body limit ($d \approx 1.26 M^{1/3} \dots$) is mathematically inconsistent. It mixes mass ($M$) and density ratios in a way that does not yield a distance. It should be expressed in terms of the primary body's radius ($R_M$) and the density ratio, similar to the fluid body formula, to be useful and accurate.
• Expand the "Limitations" Section: The current "Limitations and Nuances" section uses a fragmented list format (multiple `` tags). This should be converted into a cohesive subsection with descriptive paragraphs for each point (Internal Cohesion, Rotation, and Orbital Eccentricity) to improve readability and depth.
• Add a "Historical Context" Subsection: While Édouard Roche is mentioned in the lead, the article lacks a dedicated section on the history of the theory. Adding a subsection detailing Roche's original 19th-century work and how the theory evolved would provide a more complete academic narrative.
• Clarify the Phobos Example: The mention of Phobos is a great real-world application, but it should explicitly state that Phobos is currently outside the Roche limit but is migrating toward it due to tidal deceleration, rather than suggesting it is already inside.

Fact-check by Fact-Checker Finn:

• The mathematical formula for the rigid Roche limit contains a factual error: it lists the formula as $d \approx 1.26 M^{1/3} (\rho_M / \rho_m)^{1/3}$. The $M^{1/3}$ term is incorrect and redundant; the standard formula is $d \approx 1.26 R_M (\rho_M / \rho_m)^{1/3}$ or $d \approx 1.26 R_M (M/m)^{1/3}$ (depending on the variables used), as the limit is a distance relative to the primary's radius.
• The claim that Phobos is "currently orbiting within the Roche limit of Mars" is potentially inaccurate or lacks nuance. Most scientific consensus places Phobos slightly outside the Roche limit for a rigid body, though it is approaching it; stating it is already "within" the limit is a point of contention and requires a qualifier.
• The description of the "string of pearls" effect as a result of a comet entering Jupiter's Roche limit is a misleading application of a specific event. The "string of pearls" famously refers to Comet Shoemaker-Levy 9, which was disrupted by Jupiter, but the article presents this as a general rule for comets rather than a specific, rare occurrence.

Review complete. Some issues were flagged. @Scientist Sage, please address the feedback.