371:), and even though I didn't do an exhaustive count, I spotted a minimum of 24 separate supernovae discovered by amateurs in that year alone (8 by Koichi Itagaki, 7 by Stuart Parker, 3 by Tim Puckett, 3 by Greg Bock, 2 by L.A.G. Monard, and 1 by Patrick Wiggins). Some Google-searching verifies that each of them is an amateur astronomer, and since I didn't take the time to check every name on the list, I'm sure that I missed a number of other amateurs who discovered supernovae. Moreover,
379:
are just two examples of amateurs amassing an impressive number of supernova discoveries over the years. So while discovering a supernova is a wonderful achievement for an amateur astronomer, I don't think that an individual discovery would necessarily constitute a significant event as required by
366:
Hi stleary, thank you for your feedback. I think that the major issue is whether it is generally notable for amateurs to discover supernovae. As an observational astronomer, I would say that it is common knowledge within our field that amateur astronomers discover supernovae on a fairly regular
324:
2. If that person otherwise remains, and is likely to remain, a low-profile individual. Biographies in these cases can give undue weight to the event and conflict with neutral point of view. In such cases, it is usually better to merge the information and redirect the person's name to the event
286:. There's coverage, but it's all either local news or about SN 2008ha. I think some of this article could probably be merged there, but I'm not sure exactly what. As such, a redirection would be alright if that's the consensus.
215:, already has its own article, and it identifies her as one of the co-discoverers. I propose deleting her biography and amending the supernova article to mention her distinction as the then-youngest person to discover a supernova.
179:
210:
Ms. Moore's achievement is impressive, but she is a person notable for one event only (WP:BLP1E). It is not uncommon for talented amateur astronomers to discover new supernovae. The supernova she co-discovered,
380:
the notability policy. Also, I agree with you that SN 2009he hasn't received significant attention and that the iOptron award is part of the SN 2008ha event. Regarding the award, it doesn't seem to satisfy
301:
I agree that the question should be raised. My understanding is that all of the criteria for deletion under (WP:BLP1E) needs to be satisfied. I am not yet convinced that this is the case.
132:
404:
173:
232:
430:
already a C-class article. If it were a stub, then the decision to redirect or delete would be more clear; both Astro4686 and stlearly make valid arguments.
139:
314:
Young astronomer of the year, 2009, by iOptron
Corporation (the award could potentially be considered as part of the SN2008ha discovery event)
384:
because it seems to be mentioned only in the context of Ms. Moore's discovery. I can't find any significant coverage of the award itself.
321:
I am not sure that this is satisfied, given that two discoveries were made. However, the SN2009he event appears to be sparsely covered.
105:
100:
443:
17:
109:
381:
92:
194:
161:
466:
40:
291:
372:
331:
3. If the event is not significant or the individual's role was either not substantial or not well documented.
155:
264:
448:
416:
393:
295:
270:
244:
224:
151:
74:
462:
287:
36:
201:
439:
408:
385:
236:
216:
412:
389:
376:
260:
240:
220:
187:
96:
367:
basis. For example, I glanced at the list of supernovae discovered in the year 2015 (available at
340:
I am not certain that this is the case. Can you please provide some backup for this statement?
368:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
461:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
57:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
167:
435:
334:
This seems unlikely to be the case, but please provide justification if you think it is.
88:
80:
62:
355:
337:"It is not uncommon for talented amateur astronomers to discover new supernovae".
126:
318:
1. If reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a single event.
350:
This is my first attempt at contributing to a talk page, please bear with me.
283:
256:
212:
51:
259:
with the relevant record-of-youngest-discovery information merged. -
455:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
369:
http://www.cbat.eps.harvard.edu/lists/RecentSupernovae.html
122:
118:
114:
186:
328:
This is likely, given lack of new events since 2009.
347:
I wrote the original entry, so I have some interest.
200:
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
469:). No further edits should be made to this page.
405:list of Astronomy-related deletion discussions
8:
403:Note: This debate has been included in the
233:list of Science-related deletion discussions
231:Note: This debate has been included in the
402:
230:
304:The person is notable for 3 events:
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
24:
1:
449:15:00, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
417:08:47, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
394:07:36, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
296:06:34, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
75:14:35, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
271:09:57, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
245:08:27, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
225:08:19, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
486:
458:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
382:WP:notability (awards)
311:Discovery of SN2009he
308:Discovery of SN2008ha
58:(non-admin closure)
343:Full disclosure:
419:
247:
60:
477:
460:
447:
288:NinjaRobotPirate
267:
205:
204:
190:
142:
130:
112:
72:
67:
56:
34:
485:
484:
480:
479:
478:
476:
475:
474:
473:
467:deletion review
456:
434:
377:Puckett's group
269:
265:
147:
138:
103:
87:
84:
68:
63:
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
483:
481:
472:
471:
421:
420:
399:
398:
397:
396:
360:
352:
351:
348:
316:
315:
312:
309:
299:
298:
273:
263:
261:The Bushranger
249:
248:
208:
207:
144:
89:Caroline Moore
83:
81:Caroline Moore
78:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
482:
470:
468:
464:
459:
453:
452:
451:
450:
445:
441:
437:
433:
429:
425:
418:
414:
410:
406:
401:
400:
395:
391:
387:
383:
378:
374:
370:
365:
364:
363:
362:
361:
358:
357:
349:
346:
345:
344:
341:
338:
335:
332:
329:
326:
322:
319:
313:
310:
307:
306:
305:
302:
297:
293:
289:
285:
281:
277:
274:
272:
268:
266:One ping only
262:
258:
254:
251:
250:
246:
242:
238:
234:
229:
228:
227:
226:
222:
218:
214:
203:
199:
196:
193:
189:
185:
181:
178:
175:
172:
169:
166:
163:
160:
157:
153:
150:
149:Find sources:
145:
141:
137:
134:
128:
124:
120:
116:
111:
107:
102:
98:
94:
90:
86:
85:
82:
79:
77:
76:
73:
71:
66:
59:
54:
53:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
457:
454:
431:
427:
423:
422:
373:Robert Evans
359:
353:
342:
339:
336:
333:
330:
327:
323:
320:
317:
303:
300:
279:
275:
252:
209:
197:
191:
183:
176:
170:
164:
158:
148:
135:
69:
64:
50:redirect to
49:
47:
31:
28:
426:because it
174:free images
436:Tom.Reding
463:talk page
424:Weak keep
409:Astro4686
386:Astro4686
325:article.
284:SN 2008ha
257:SN 2008ha
237:Astro4686
217:Astro4686
213:SN 2008ha
52:SN 2008ha
37:talk page
465:or in a
276:Redirect
253:Redirect
133:View log
39:or in a
356:stleary
180:WP refs
168:scholar
106:protect
101:history
152:Google
110:delete
280:merge
195:JSTOR
156:books
140:Stats
127:views
119:watch
115:links
65:Davey
16:<
444:dgaf
440:talk
413:talk
390:talk
375:and
292:talk
241:talk
221:talk
188:FENS
162:news
123:logs
97:talk
93:edit
70:2010
354:--
282:to
278:or
255:to
202:TWL
131:– (
55:.
428:is
415:)
407:.
392:)
294:)
243:)
235:.
223:)
182:)
125:|
121:|
117:|
113:|
108:|
104:|
99:|
95:|
446:)
442:⋅
438:(
432:~
411:(
388:(
290:(
239:(
219:(
206:)
198:·
192:·
184:·
177:·
171:·
165:·
159:·
154:(
146:(
143:)
136:·
129:)
91:(
61:–
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.