Jump to content

Talk:Farm Cove Observatory

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

For goodness sake - I never put this entry on this site - do what ever you want. - Jennie McCormick

To those changing this entry - The observatory I own at Farm Cove is an amateur observatory and I am very happy with that title. Please do not change it back to Professional. - Cheers Jennie McCormick.Jen99 Jen 09:39, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jennie, no offense but should this entry even exist? There are many private amateur observatories around the world, often contributing in a meaningful way to astronomy as you have, but they quite rightly don't get wikispace. Why should your own? It sets a precedent: do all private and amateur observatories deserve a Wiki entry? How about schools, etc? Just some food for thought.210.55.81.117 12:15, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reference to the Sky & Telescope article emphasises the contribution made to the planet discovery by two amateur astronomers using small telescopes - in a field where "small telescope" usually means a 1m class instrument. The FCO telescope is only 0.25m so this is a notable achievement on a number of levels.

The last amateur astronomer to discover a planet was Sir William Herschel when he found Uranus in 1781. He then became very famous. The FCO telescope is therefore the smallest telescope to contribute to the discovery of a planet.

A review of the entries in the ADS system (http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abstract_service.html)under "McCormick, J" shows that FCO has contributed data to at least 7 major papers in peer-reviewed astronomical and astrophysical publications.

Therefore FCO is clearly a notable amateur observatory that has an established record of success that has been recognised internationally.

It is certainly not a "professional" observatory but that is no criteria for notability.

Only two amateur astronomers contributed to the discover of the planet - not the many suggested by 210.54.197.158 This was the first time since 1781 that amateurs had achieved this is notable.

Observatories are known and recognised by their names, not by the names of the people who happen to operate the telescope. FCO is the appropriate way to describe this facility - not "jennie". 219.88.175.78 21:05, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • sky & telescopes mag is having article about amateurish observatory on every month -- these are notable in some way for research & discovery, education etc also. we must decide if *all* such observatorys deserving have wiki pages. i think not. and to call the farm cove observatory 'fco' is so grandiose don't you think? ;-) Marek 80.95.106.173 22:47, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Just for the record, this article was created as collateral damage during a collection of vandalism that happened in July 2005 by a particular person who lives in Auckland who wanted to antagonise and enflame some other people involved in the NZ astronomy scene. (I believe Jennie knows who he is, though I'm certain she has nothing to do with his actions, nor supports them.) Since this particular article was created as a stub, and well after that vandalism, Jennie became aware of Wikipedia, noticed the article existed, and kindly helped to contribute some more detailed information. The vandal user has recently come back and decided to do some similar things all over again to antagonise other NZ astronomy people, which seems to be what triggered this issue to come up now. The irony here is that even though the vandal created it, he's just-below criticised Jennie for the fact that this article was here, on the grounds that it wasn't notable. (See the "no offence" comment below.)
Jennie, I'm sorry that you've been dragged into this simply because someone used your excellent work as a means to antagonise others as part of that great cesspool of politics that unfortunately exists between a small group in NZ astronomy. Wikipedia's a neat resource, but I suppose that doesn't mean it can't be yet another platform for this sort of thing from time to time. If it comes to a VFD then I'm going to leave it up to others to decide what's most appropriate, but I do find it saddening that one specific person could whip up so much antagonism which I know has given several people a bad first impression of Wikipedia as a result. Those people could have been great contributors in another scenario, but now they just see the whole thing as a waste of time. Oh well -- back to editing. Izogi 09:45, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To the cowardly person from the South Island who chooses to hide behind a IP number, if you are going to change this entry, please make sure you have the correct information before doing so. Seems to me you are nothing but a dishonest vandal with jelously to vent. ~Jennie~

Do you guys have nothing better to do? If you are such a fan of Wikipedia why not go and find other sites to waste your time on - just remember not to make it personal as you have been doing here. Could you also explain to me please what in your Wikipedia experience a professional observtory is? P.S If someone is going to put my work and observatory on this site then of course I am going to correct the errors in the entry. Jennie McCormickJen 10:28, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    • This is a very borderline case. I've tidied the text and linkage up a little. Still barely enough to justify inclusion. There are many, many private astronomical observatories around the world, all quietly contributing in their own way, and this one is hardly a stand-out. I seem to recall another battle over a similar facility last year? But dear me, New Zealand astronomy seems to generate a lot of antagonism! I hope I've eased some of that, and the generally the npov aspects of this article now, but if it came down to a VfD, I'd vote for deletion. 217.96.105.6 00:01, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • That is not the point. The article already exists, as some person must have believed one deserved to, so we must decide if they were correct. You have edited it many times, so you must also feel strongly about it too. As an amateur astronomer, I see much of interest in your work, but as a fan of Wikipedia I see little to merit an article. Marhabah min al Kuwait! 213.132.254.2 05:30, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What's going on here? Isn't this just another home observatory in the burbs? What's with the edit war? Somebody seems to be trying to portray this thing as way more than it is. ("FCO"? Gimme a break! The lady has a 10" Meade!) Is this amateur's personal observatory directly affiliated with a College or University or is it just a personal hobby? There are a ton of those in just about every country and they don't spend so much time trying to build themselves up on Wiki as the person behind this observatory does. If you browse the sites of those amateurs it's obvious that most of them are also part of some project or ongoing survey or other and have done good work too, so in other words they are no different or better or worse than this private deal you're slugging it out over. This has all the hallmarks of huge egos with too much spare time on their hands. VfD this or write it up accurately: a private individual's personal observatory in the suburbs with a small off-the-shelf telescope, and which sometimes contributes data to a research project or two. Just like a lot of other amateur astronomers do. 216.11.0.254 22:31, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Farm Cove Observatory is a genuine astronomical observatory, in the sense that it is a place where a telescope is situated permanently, where Jennie McCormick and her numerous individual and institutional collaborators engage in contributing to meaningful, peer-reviewed research, which contributes to the general body of astronomical academic knowledge, and advances in our understanding of specific and important astrophysical processes. If anyone would like to verify this, please try an author-name journal search using 'McCormick, J.', with any of the common reference and citation indices available on the internet, e.g. the NASA ADS. Cheers, Paul Warhurst, Dept of Physics, University of Auckland, New Zealand. 130.216.54.109 06:58, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Fascinating. But how does that justify this particular amateur observatory for inclusion on Wikipedia? There are a lot of amateur observatories around the world which "...engage in contributing to meaningful, peer-reviewed research, which contributes to the general body of astronomical academic knowledge, and advances in our understanding of specific and important astrophysical processes." Should we have Wikipedia articles for them all, as they are no more nor less notable than your own amateur observatory? 69.90.147.109 07:47, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Whilst the work done by this amateur is mildly interesting insufficient notability has been demonstrated to warrant an article here. Perhaps it is time to draw a line. It seems sensible to list only recognised professional institutions lest Wikipedia become degraded to the point of uselessness by the inclusion of every private hobbiest project. Eilatybartfast 09:33, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Farm Cove Observatory. 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:

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) 11:30, 28 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Farm Cove Observatory. 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:

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) 13:31, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Farm_Cove_Observatory&oldid=1207183200"