Talk:Nakhla meteorite

Astronomy: Mars / Solar System Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Mars task force.
	This article is supported by Solar System task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Geology: Meteorites High‑importance

	Geology portal Talk:Nakhla meteorite is part of WikiProject Geology, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use geology resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.GeologyWikipedia:WikiProject GeologyTemplate:WikiProject GeologyGeology articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Meteorites task force (assessed as High-importance).

Egypt Low‑importance

	Egypt portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Egypt, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Egypt 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.EgyptWikipedia:WikiProject EgyptTemplate:WikiProject EgyptEgypt articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on June 28, 2018 and June 28, 2023.

Nakhla or Nakhal?

Both spellings are used in this article. Alpheus 11:43, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nakhla is correct; I've corrected the article Zamphuor 11:57, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Further question is it "Abu Hommos" or "Abu Hummus". The latter is the only one I can find on Google maps: http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=31.101084,30.318747&spn=0.032925,0.064545&t=h&z=14&lci=com.panoramio.all Allmedia (talk) 20:00, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vaporized?

Yeah, very convenient. No evidence. For me, this story about dog killed by meteorite is BS. --Madcio 11:14, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Inappropriate link removal

The reference http://www.nakhladogmeteorites.com/aboutnakhladog.htm was removed [1] because it was considered "unreliable source". However in my opinion it is a mistake because the source of an apocryphal and unreliable story have not to be reliable. Moreover it was needed in order to account for the "vaporization" and so on. I suggest to restore it or replace with a different source with the same details about the story. -- Basilicofresco (msg) 23:03, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Martian?

Could the article explain more clearly how scientists know that the meteorite originated from Mars? — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 15:11, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that this is a vital concern, especially the date that it was first surmised, then established, to be of martian origin. otherwise, people reading it will assume that scientists knew in 1911 that it was of martian origin, which is impossible, i beleive.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 16:03, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Strewn field

Shouldn't this article be added to the Strewn field category? If yes, the infobox parameter |Strewn_field should be set to "yes".-- Pyramid ion 18:35, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]