Hi Mike and all!
3.4 Meteorites of unknown or poorly known provenance.
(a) Withheld information. Where the source of a new meteorite cannot be
determined due to the withholding of geographic information by a collector
or other party, the name should be chosen to reflect the smallest geographic
feature identifying the collection location with certainty. If the location
information is too vague, or is uncertain or disputed, the name Nova
followed by the next available three-digit number should be adopted as the
permanent name.
(b) Transported meteorites. When the provenance of a new meteorite cannot
be determined due to a lack of sufficient historical information, it should
be named after the locality where it was first recognized. For meteorites
found in institutions such as universities and museums, the name may be
either that of the institution, the collection, or the city in which the
institution is located. In accordance with§3.6, the names of people, even if
part of the official name of the collection, should be avoided.
(c) Meteorites found in large numbers. In cases where many meteorites are
found and distributed or sold without careful documentation of provenance, a
numbered sequence of generic names should be used as in §3.3c, wherein the
prefix reflects the geographic area in which the meteorites were most likely
recovered (e.g., Northwest Africa, for meteorites coming from marketplaces
in Morocco).
That might help answer your questions.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Gilmer" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, April 20, 2012 9:20 AM
Subject: [meteorite-list] Met Bulletin Updates - 2 NWA's and a Nova,and a
Question regarding Nomenclature
Greetings Bulletin Geeks,
There are 3 new approvals today. Two NWA's - a CK5 and L5. And one
new "Nova" find - an iron from Russia.
Question - it has been my understanding that Nova names are reserved
for those meteorites with dubious location data. So, why is it that
many of the Labenne finds have not been renamed as Nova finds? And
this new Russian iron seems to have find data similar to the majority
of NWA's, so why aren't more NWA's classified as Novas? Is it because
there are just too many NWA's?
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meteor/metbull.php?sea=&sfor=names&ants=&falls=&valids=&stype=contains&lrec=50&map=ge&browse=&country=All&srt=name&categ=All&mblist=All&rect=&phot=&snew=1&pnt=Normal%20table&dr=&page=0
Best regards,
MikeG
--
-----------------------------------------------------------
Galactic Stone & Ironworks - MikeG
Web: http://www.galactic-stone.com
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/galacticstone
Twitter: http://twitter.com/GalacticStone
RSS: http://www.galactic-stone.com/rss/126516
-----------------------------------------------------------
______________________________________________
Visit the Archives at
http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
Meteorite-list mailing list
[email protected]
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
______________________________________________
Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
Meteorite-list mailing list
[email protected]
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
