Jump to content

Talk:2007 Carancas impact event: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
m rm sp
No edit summary
Line 98: Line 98:
Do we really need to read about the coordinates ''three'' times? —[[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] | [[User talk:Viriditas|Talk]] 08:49, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Do we really need to read about the coordinates ''three'' times? —[[User:Viriditas|Viriditas]] | [[User talk:Viriditas|Talk]] 08:49, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
:Ditto--they should be removed from the body text. -[[User:EHM02667|Eric]] [[User talk:EHM02667|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 12:34, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
:Ditto--they should be removed from the body text. -[[User:EHM02667|Eric]] [[User talk:EHM02667|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 12:34, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

==Another idea==
From [http://www.badastronomy.com/bablog/2007/09/20/meteorite-mayhem-part-ii-maybe-missile-mayhem/ bad astronomy blog] [[User:87.194.198.122|87.194.198.122]] 18:19, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 18:19, 23 September 2007

WikiProject iconPeru Start‑class Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is supported by WikiProject Peru. This project provides a central approach to Peru-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Peru To-do:

Redirects

I've redirected Peru meteor and Peru meteor illness to this article as likely search terms that people may look for, in regards to this major event. • Lawrence Cohen 16:30, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Title

Shouldn't this be moved to "2007 Peruvian meteorite illness," since it's a meteorite and not a meteor? Kuralyov 21:31, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good point; I just fixed it. • Lawrence Cohen 22:09, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Glowing object

This isn't the first time I've seen reference in news sources to statements that almost seem to be saying that the object still has some sort of detectable "glow". If it's a meteorite, that is... unlikely. Meteorites wouldn't be glowing for nearly 96 hours. Can anyone find any news references around this? It seems a fairly substantial little point, as it keeps coming up, but if its not significant in the end, I don't want to have to leave the article sounding like Fox Mulder's laundry is down that hole. • Lawrence Cohen 01:27, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The referenced article doesn't actually say that the object is still glowing, just that it was glowing when it was falling.
"The health authority has officially requested that people stay away from the glowing object that fell from the sky. He made this request due to the fact that many curious people have come from all over to observe the crater."--User:Zelandonia 03:32, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, alright. I had misread that. • Lawrence Cohen 13:44, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Undue weight

The Pravda news is been given undue weight. As long as their statements are not picked up or debated by other sources, it should be removed. Consequently, I moved the part to the talk page so that it can be easily readded later on. Sijo Ripa 14:52, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

""On September 20, Russian tabloid "Pravda" stated that the meteorite was in fact the secret United States spy satellite known as the KH-13, which crashed in Peru. According to Russia, it was targetting Iran, was "destroyed in it's orbit", and that the illnesses were caused by the KH-13's radioactive Pu-238 power generator surving the re-entry and crash. Additionally, Russians have said that Americans themselves brought down the satellite from the United States Air Forces' 30th Space Wing located at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California.[1]""

Does this on the NY Times count as a reliable source? • Lawrence Cohen 15:11, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't know, but I think so. :) Would have been more satisfied with an independent conclusion, rather than a reference to Pravda though. Sijo Ripa 15:17, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I'll wait a while before re-adding, just to see what pops up in the news on it during the day. It's such an insane/plausible/magical theory that you never know... • Lawrence Cohen 15:22, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Even if proven false, I think it should be mentioned in the article. I suppose the event might become somewhat famous among conspiracy groups, and the Pravda statement in itself might become worthy of encyclopedic interest. Of course, specify that the contents of the Pravda article are debatable/unverified/whatever. 151.41.234.48 10:28, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Saying that it is debatable requires a source. Otherwise it would be violate V, NPOV and NOR. I don't think we'll find sources that debate this. Undue weight however could still apply. Sijo Ripa 10:42, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See Also

I followed the link to The Colour Out of Space but don't feel it is relevant or appropriate to this article, but leaving it there for now and see what the rest of you think. Looks like someone is pushing a book. EdX20 23:34, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's an old story, from 1927, and a classic, so I'd left it in after they added it--a curious little bit where old sci-fi fiction from the 1920s basically came true here, with a "toxic" meteor, or close enough. • Lawrence Cohen 23:39, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Lovecraft story is indeed about an object that falls to earth and causes a mysterious illness. However, the resemblance ends there. In the Lovecraft story, the illness is of an apparently supernatural form, as animals mysteriously sicken and the color leaches out of plants; the object is suggested to be an alien organism which later departs, although leaving behind a ghastly landscape. It presents Lovecraft's theme that an alien organism is likely to be truly alien -- unrecognizable and therefore surreal and creepy -- in nature, rather than being the typical "little green men" of pulp fiction. But it has little to do with real meteorites (or spy satellites) and the real consequences thereof. --FOo 05:33, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed move

Any ideas on moving the article to 2007 Peruvian meteorite impact? I think more info on impact will be avaliable in the future. --Brand спойт 21:29, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think that is a good idea, but maybe later? It feels like nearly half the media is still on the associated illness. • Lawrence Cohen 21:33, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I would vote for soon, how about now? The illness is poorly documented. The impact, if it is a meteorite or even some space debris, is a rare event. There are other documented meteors recovered soon after arrivel (Allende), but I don't know of any with a documented crater.Pustelnik 23:41, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Would 2007 Peruvian meteorite impact or 2007 Peruvian meteorite event be better? • Lawrence Cohen 23:41, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Checking Category:Impact events, it seems most similar articles are "events" rather than "impacts". --Victor12 23:45, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Done to 2007 Peruvian meteorite event, I got all the redirects too. • Lawrence Cohen 23:49, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Great! Good job with this article btw. --Victor12 23:53, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. :) • Lawrence Cohen 23:54, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Map

Could we get a more specific location there? Brutannica 21:32, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't seen anything more precise yet that we could base it on. • Lawrence Cohen 21:37, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently: 16°33.933′S 69°2.500′W / 16.565550°S 69.041667°W / -16.565550; -69.041667[1]. • Lawrence Cohen 22:52, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of "The Color out of Space" from 'See Also' footing of article.

Someone tagged a popular H.P. Lovecraft story "The Color out of Space," to this article in its 'See Also' footer. I removed it due to viral advertising of non-related Wiki articles being somewhat an abusive use of the 'See Also' section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bog4rt (talkcontribs) 22:41, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Zombies?

This is similar to the Resident Evil 4 story. First something extra-terrestrial crashes in some hespanic town, next the villagers are zombies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.97.221.81 (talk) 05:59, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously, the meteorite impact was arranged as a movie promotion. Did you know a meteor shower was visible in Los Angeles the night Stardust premiered? • Lawrence Cohen 06:07, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Did I miss something here? "...next the villagers are zombies", in other words, "animated human bodies devoid of souls"?! Oh, actually, going by Wikipedia's definition of Soul, they might be... has somebody asked them if they have any "self-aware essence"? Bistromathic 12:52, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Falsetto? Ears?

Amongst suspected symptoms, however, are the impromptu growth of multiple eyes and/or ears in various places across the body, the inability to pass urine and the uncanny ability to sing in falsetto. Scientists, however, deny that these phenomena have anything to with either the meteorite or recent spates of cross-species breeding which have become commonplace in the area. This can't be true... can it? 199.126.186.147 02:18, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It was a joke that someone snuck in. It was already removed. Besides, everyone knows that Triffids arrived with the meteorite. • Lawrence Cohen 02:27, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Only in the movie, in the book they came from Russia :-p Victory Is Mine 19:35, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Categories

The redirect page 2007 Peruvian meteorite illness has been categorized under Category:Ailments of unknown etiology. Is it ok to categorize redirects? Or should that category go to the article itself, that is to 2007 Peruvian meteorite event? --Victor12 15:53, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not really sure, I saw that before. Anyone know? • Lawrence Cohen 17:00, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This seems to be the relevant guideline: Wikipedia:Categorizing redirects. Does it apply here? --Victor12 17:09, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Chondrite meteorite?

I am worried because I am not seeing the pieces, the microscopic pictures, a press conference with chromatographic charts, etc. Where is the evidence to back the claims? This an extraordinary event (I don't know of a crater that big in modern times) and I think we must be careful about the speculations, even those speculations coming from the so-called reputable scientists at the site.Aldo L 00:22, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

calor

"Most meteorites are actually cold when they land on Earth, since their outer layers burn up and break away from the objects before impacting."
-- Ah, hmm, perhaps. But what would this have to do with the impact's heat?
--Jerome Potts 05:26, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disinformation

The impression I get is that no-one knows what actually happened and people are just putting together the best theory they can come up with based on fragmentary, unverified "evidence" and opinions from people who may or may not be qualified to give opinions and may well be operating with exactly the same lack of actual information. Toby Douglass 06:10, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinates

Do we really need to read about the coordinates three times? —Viriditas | Talk 08:49, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto--they should be removed from the body text. -Eric (talk) 12:34, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another idea

From bad astronomy blog 87.194.198.122 18:19, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]