Talk:Alpha Ursae Majorids

Delete this entry?

This shower is not included in the Wikipedia list of established meteor showers and the first reference does not look to be a reliable source. In any case the title should be Ursae Majorids, not Ursa, which suggests the person who introduced this entry is also an unreliable source. I propose it should be deleted.Skeptic2 (talk) 18:54, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Agree. The Alpha Ursae Majorid shower does not appear on the list of established meteor showers of the Meteor Data Center of Commission F1 of the IAU (http://pallas.astro.amu.edu.pl/~jopek/MDC2007/Roje/roje_lista.php?corobic_roje=1&sort_roje=0 ). It only appears on the Working List of Meteor Showers ( http://pallas.astro.amu.edu.pl/~jopek/MDC2007/Roje/roje_lista.php?corobic_roje=2&sort_roje=0 ), so the existence of the shower seems a bit uncertain, and therefore is unsuitable for an encyclopedia. As Skeptic2 very correctly stated, the name should be Alpha Ursae Majorids, not Alpha Ursa Majorids. Delete.

TowardsTheLight (talk) 20:23, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Existence isn't in doubt. Notability is questionable, though. Not the sort of shower people are going to come across casually. I have renamed it and provide a more reliable source so people can make an educated decision. Lithopsian (talk) 20:47, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Oppose. These three sources [1], [2] (from 1922, possibly a bit dated, I admit), and [3] list it as a valid meteor shower, and give specific data on it, which can help expand the infobox. Edward-Woodrow (talk) 20:47, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

There are five established meteor showers from Ursa Major in the IAU list (see the link given by TowardsTheLight), but this is not among them. It does appear on the Working List of Meteor Showers, but so do 22 others from Ursa Major. Why choose this one? The fact that the entry is mis-named suggests that it has been added to WP just to create clicks to the first reference.Skeptic2 (talk) 17:52, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

@Skeptic2: The naming problem has been corrected, and if the first reference is a problem, it can be removed. Edward-Woodrow (talk) 20:37, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

I have corrected the name in the text and removed the first reference (which is clearly a clickbait site), but you have still not explained why this shower deserves mention more than the others in Ursa Major which are not mentioned.Skeptic2 (talk) 22:33, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

What about a compromise: an article titled Meteor showers in Ursa Major (or something similar) that gives coverage of all the meteor showers in Ursa Major. Edward-Woodrow (talk) 22:47, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

I know we have two or three articles already about individual showers, but are any of them really notable? Some clarity about names would be helpful though, since at least one of the showers is sometimes referred to simply as Ursids (I might have answered my own question about whether any of them are notable!) and other "Ursids" should be distinguished. An article about meteor showers that are too obscure to have their own articles almost screams out its own lack of notability. There is a section in Ursa Major that would make a good redirect target for a short list of meteor showers. Lithopsian (talk) 14:02, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

• Support: @Skeptic2: I revise my position; there's very little actual data out there beyond routine mentions in tables and data sets. What little information there is in the article could be adequately covered at Ursa Major- redirect to the relevant section per @Lithopsian. Edward-Woodrow (talk) 13:01, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

  Thank you. So who is going to take the next step? Skeptic2 (talk) 18:59, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

  I have redirected the article to Ursa Major#Meteor showers, and added a brief description of the showers there. Edward-Woodrow (talk) 22:17, 30 March 2023 (UTC)