Perhaps those who seek to commercially trade new falls within the first few
weeks of recovery need to be a bit more careful with _their_ nomenclature.
There is a reason why a formal naming process exists (and face it, "West" is
a horrible name that should never have been used). IMO, if you're going to
sell early, you shouldn't give it a name at all, just a description ("the
recent, as-yet-unnamed fall near West, Texas").
I can say with some confidence, as somebody who only deals with meteorites
in scientific collections, that this name "change" isn't going to cause any
confusion at all.
Chris
*****************************************
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Ford" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2009 10:01 AM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Name of Texas Fall: Ash Creek
Steve has a point there, is the new name cross correlated in some way
with 'West' in the actual database? (It just came up as Ash Creek when I
searched). - Just worries me it's a great way to loose a few thousand
specimens of a fall, if in the future you can't cross correlate the
label names!
I also wonder if there was any way a name could be officially assigned
at the time of a fall rather than several months after it's recovered?
Out of interest, is the name that's given the nearest place/town to the
first recovery, or to the majority location of the finds? How's it
decided?
Best,
Mark
listinfo/meteorite-list
______________________________________________
http://www.meteoritecentral.com
Meteorite-list mailing list
[email protected]
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
