Talk:85D/Boethin

Astronomy: Astronomical objects / 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 WikiProject Astronomical objects, which collaborates on articles related to astronomical objects.
	This article is supported by Solar System task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Wild theory

I've come across a weird theory telling that the Boethin comet is the same object as the WD5 asteroid. However, the only source I found is this article. So it is certainly a hoax, be warned. Kromsson (talk) 14:46, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comet Boethin never broke up!

Citation from http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/NASA_Sends_Spacecraft_On_Mission_To_Comet_Hartley_2_999.html

"Scientists theorize comet Boethin may have broken up into pieces too small for detection."

I am experienced amateur astronomer strongly interested in comets. Comet 85P was observed on 1975 and 1986 apparitions and was not observed in 1997 and (yet) 2008 apparitions [1] [2]. I know that comet Boethin never broke up! We could lose it because of non-gravitational forces [?] or non-stable brightness. There was no attempts to recover this comet on 1997 because it was almost exactly behind the Sun [3]. On 2008 there was few (negative) attempts to recover it (down to 25 mag) [4].

Therefore, I delete the citation. — Chesnok (talk) 08:40, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's interesting, but Yahoo groups are not a reliable source. Even if you had a reliable source that states this point of view, we should include both hypotheses, to satisfy encyclopedic breadth. --Dhartung | Talk 22:51, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The New York Times is not a reliable source. At Yahoo groups, there is many competent astronomers but Henry Fountain is not an astronomer. — Chesnok (talk) 08:02, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have found the source of this statement. It is strange that I haven't heard about it until now. This unsuccesful attempt to observe 85P and estimation of possible 85P remnants was not widely known among amateur astronomers. — Chesnok (talk) 16:50, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 85P/Boethin. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://archive.is/20120719133525/http://epoxi.umd.edu/7press/news/20071213c.shtml to http://epoxi.umd.edu/7press/news/20071213c.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:15, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]