Talk:Stars named after people

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Stars named after people article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

A fact from Stars named after people appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 19 August 2005. The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that three of the stars named after people, often thought to have traditional Arabic names, were in fact named for members of the Apollo 1 crew?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2005/August.

Wikipedia

Anthroponymy Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthroponymy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the study of people's names on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AnthroponymyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthroponymyTemplate:WikiProject AnthroponymyAnthroponymy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Astronomy: Solar System Low‑importance

	Astronomy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.AstronomyWikipedia:WikiProject AstronomyTemplate:WikiProject AstronomyAstronomy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Solar System task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Untitled[edit]

We need to choose whether this is List Of Stars... or just Stars.... I vote Stars....

Alternative Point of View[edit]

I have tried to remove some of the "astronomer bias" out of this article. The fact remains that commercial star naming companies disclaim association with the scientific community and inform consumers that star naming is a novelty gift. Informed consumers make the purchase anyway. This is a controversial subject where only the astronomers view is being provided. I have tried to temper the astronomers bias out of this controversy. My edits should stand. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Glennconti (talk • contribs) 14:38, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This article states a fact the there are star naming companies. Then goes on only to provide a one sided "astronomers" opinion on that star naming. I have tried multiple times to add also an industry position that is non-advertising but by its nature shows a positive side to commercial star naming. "man with two legs" keeps reverting my edits no mater how benign. He wants to only show the astronomer's opinion. It is wrong. I think information from this non-advertisement industry informed editorial should also be included. http://www.starnamer.net/editorial.html

Glennconti (talk) 11:11, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your talk page indicates a likely conflict of interest in your edits. --Killing Vector (talk) 11:37, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am only trying to establish a NPOV for the article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view Glennconti (talk) 12:01, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As an alternative I have found the following astronomer's research which also supports my claim that the public wants to name stars even when well informed about the astronomers dim view of commercial star naming. http://www.delscope.demon.co.uk/information/namingstars.htm#surveyres Glennconti (talk) 01:18, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, this is beginning to get silly. An unscientific internet poll is not a reliable source. --Killing Vector (talk) 01:29, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How else would all these star naming companies exist? You are either being disingenuous in denying that there is substantial consumer demand or you are being patronizing as concerns the star buying consumer. They are informed, there's lots of them, they are not stupid and they don't care what astronomer's think. However you just want to keep promulgating the lie that they are just stupid victims. How could they possibly want to name a star when the all knowing astronomer has told them they can't? Well they still do. Get over it. Am Invoking WP:IAR Glennconti (talk) 02:15, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Scam[edit]

I have added a section on commercial "star naming". My original source for the comment on astonomers not revealing the truth was an article I read some years ago, almost certainly in Sky and Telescope magazine. Man with two legs 11:29, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can attest (Original research, oh noes!!) that an amateur astronomer well-known by his fellows here in New Mexico told me pretty much the same thing; that star-naming companies maintain their own catalogues, which are not officially recognized. An uncle of mine died young, and his sisters bought a star-name in his honor, and my mom asked this astronomer to find it for her. By the way, star-naming companies are mentioned at two different points in the article. --205.201.141.146 16:08, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

deadlyroads.com: "Name A Star in Memory"" seems to be in error. It says:

Only the International Astronomical Union officially names stars

untrue - IAU might from time to another give a designation to a star, but AFAIK they never name stars, because they think it is impractical and serves no identification purpose. All star names are inofficial, and instead "named" by the astronomers' culture keeping lists of star names in f.ex. N.D. Kostjuk's cross reference table. ... said: Rursus (bork²) 20:46, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An attempted search suggests that the Sky and Telescope article is Selling Stars by Philip Bagnall, Sky and Telescope, volume 92, number 4, page 6. But this is not currently available online. Man with two legs (talk) 09:55, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Categorisation[edit]

This is in Category:stars and Category:Lists of stars. An editor removed Category:stars and I have restored it. Usually an article should not be in a category and one of its sub categories but I think this is a time to bend the rule (as explicitely allowed in Wikipedia:Categorization) because:

1. if you are going to eliminate one, it should be Category:Lists of stars but the subject matter is relevant to people looking up Lists of stars who might not think to look for this article.

2. three categories in total is not a stupidly large number of categories which is the rationale behind the usual rule.

3. the purpose of categorisation according to Wikipedia:Categorization is to "help users find information, even if they don't know that it exists or what it's called."

I shall now get on with some work. Man with two legs 09:27, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gatewood's star[edit]

This name does not appear anywhere except in one science fiction story so this entry has been removed from here. References to this name were added in Lalande 21185 in fiction, Lalande 21185, and in George G. Gatewood. Aldebaran66 (talk) 21:03, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Citations banner[edit]

This list style article has had a Refimprove banner since February, 2009. All of the entries listed are linked to notable articles with extensive citations and references. I am removing this banner unless someone can say specifically what needs to be done to satisfy this purported condition. Aldebaran66 (talk) 01:44, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Covertly named stars[edit]

This section reports "Unknown to Grissom, these stars already had traditional names".... It seems somewhat odd to say that the stars' traditional names were unknown to Grissom, given that the covert names were not applied until after his death in the Apollo 1 fire. I wonder if something else was intended here.... PurpleChez (talk) 15:34, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reese's star?[edit]

See this article: 2MASS J18082002−5104378. This star seems to be known as Reese's star. Who or what is Reese? DannyCaes (talk) 19:24, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]