Talk:Northwest Africa 3009

Previous deletion

While setting up the redirects for this I discovered it had previously been deleted, twice (see Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2007_February_3#Northwest_Africa_3009), as not notable. Is there anything that makes it special? Nothing jumped out while writing it and there are over 50,000 of the things. -Arb. (talk) 22:38, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

There are currently only 33 meteorites classified as "L4-6 chondrites" (http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meteor/metbull.php?sea=L4-6&sfor=types&stype=exact&lrec=50&srt=name). This is the only article about a L4-6 chondrite on the english Wikipedia. I think we should be able to have an example of every meteorite type even if it is not notable in itself. What do you think? --Tobias1984 (talk) 12:54, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Pains me to say it but notability is notability. I could only find one online reference for this one plus some words from de:Wikipedia which themselves lack citation (do de have an equivalent of {{cn}} by the way?). One of each type is a reasonable goal but the "type specimen" (or whatever the correct technical term is) is likely the better bet when it comes to citations and hence notability. However, if you can turn up a couple more references (on or off line) then this one could be a keeper. -Arb. (talk) 14:12, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Having thought about this one a little longer I have to admit that your right. It almost seems like the owner of the meteorite posted the image to commons and then IP-edited the article so it would be on Wikipedia. The image itself only shows fusion crust which is not in any way characteristic.

I think Wikipedia DE uses (http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vorlage:Belege_fehlen) for those things. The equivalent of the cn-template is still under discussion (http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meinungsbilder/Vorlage_zur_Markierung_von_Belegm%C3%A4ngeln_(Schnellstarter)) --Tobias1984 (talk) 15:51, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Page appears to have been made by the owner of the meteorite for his own purposes. It is one of 40,000+ known equilibrated chondrites, and ~9,000+ from Northwest Africa; I would suggest page deletion. It's a nice stone, but the meteorite is not notable in ~any way. -Meteoritekid (talk) 18:04, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Arb - There are ~50 known meteorite groups, ~30 of which have 30 or fewer members (including nearly all iron meteorite groups excluding the IIABs, IIIABs, IVAs, and possible IABs, unless you take subgroups into account), and that's not including ungrouped (~unique) meteorites, of which there are hundreds. But those meteorites are chemically different from others. The "rarity" of the "L4-6" classification is simply due to the fact that the classifying scientists observed L4 and L6 material in the thin section. In other words, it is a breccia comprised of two of the most common meteorite types known. There are 1,400 approved L4s (http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meteor/metbull.php?sea=L4&sfor=types&ants=&falls=&valids=&stype=exact&lrec=50&map=ge&browse=&country=All&srt=name&categ=All&mblist=All&rect=&phot=&snew=0&pnt=Normal%20table&dr=&page=1) and 9,350 L6s (http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meteor/metbull.php?sea=L6&sfor=types&ants=&falls=&valids=&stype=exact&lrec=50&map=ge&browse=&country=All&srt=name&categ=All&mblist=All&rect=&phot=&snew=0&pnt=Normal%20table&dr=&page=1). There is nothing rare or "notable" about it. Why is this still here? -Meteoritekid (talk) 17:14, 27 October 2015 (UTC)