[meteorite-list] Wolf Creek total mass

[Frank Prochaska]

David,

	I did not mean in any way to imply that you were attacking the
NomCom regarding spelling, or that the NomCom needed defending in any way.
I apologize if you or anyone else took it that way.  You are well respected
on and off this list in the meteorite community, and I don't think anyone
took your post as a criticism of the NomCom.
	There are certainly errors and confusion, some of which relate to
issues I mentioned in my earlier post.  You bring up other issues as well
regarding older falls.  I think going back and reading material and reports
and "official" or scientific articles from around that period of time,
roughly a hundred years ago and more, show many more issues.  Frankly,
spelling was not as consistent then as it is now, even in scientific
publications and with regard to place names.  Communications and the sharing
of information were much more difficult.  We still have an occasional
"discussion" on the list regarding an unofficial name that is then changed
in the official documentation sometime later and what that does to labeling
in people's collections and how they're sold on eBay, etc.  But that pales
in comparison to some finds from a hundred years ago that might have been
known by a dozen names in various publications (with variations in spelling,
etc.) and someone later must sort out and come to consensus as to what the
"official" name is.  I still think it's a wonder there aren't more examples
of the issue you raised.
	Again, I apologize if anyone took my post as a reaction to a
perceived attack!


Frank Prochaska




-----Original Message-----
From: David Weir [mailto:dgweir at earthlink.net] 
Sent: Friday, March 10, 2006 12:24 PM
To: Frank Prochaska
Cc: meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Wolf Creek total mass

Frank,

I believe you missed the point of my post. I don't place any blame with 
the NomCom for an incorrect spelling for Lake Okeechobee recorded back 
in 1916, before the MetSoc NomCom even existed (1933), it's that I don't 
suspect there were all that many names to type into whatever official 
record existed in 1916, and being the first meteorite to be recorded 
from Florida, I'm just curious how something of such apparent importance 
got screwed up... back then. I am wondering about the wheels of the 
system of that time, and how this spelling error was allowed to 
propagate instead of being caught and corrected - by a secretary or 
somebody - before it became the "official" record. Certainly a number of 
people had to approve of this name along its way to officialdom, likely 
some from Okeechobee too. Heck, I may even have erors in spelling in 
this post, but then this is not going to be a historic record of any 
significance like the name of the first meteorite to be found in the 
state of Florida. At what point did the name Okechobee cross the 
continuum and become uncorrectable? It's a matter for history and those 
of us who have an issue with the misspelling of the name of one of only 
four meteorites known from our home state. Anyway, this was my point, 
but thanks for defending the MetSoc reputation about my post.

David

DavidFrank Prochaska wrote:
> 	Frankly, with the thousands of "official" meteorites from hundreds
> of states and countries in which scores of languages are spoken which are
> written in a number of alphabets and syllabaries (sp? - looking for the
word
> for methods of writing like kanji, not really an alphabet), let alone
issues
> like ancient American Indian place names in locations where the primary
> language is English, it's a wonder little errors like this are not much
more
> common.  I think the NomCom does a wonderful job, given their scope,
> resources, and circumstances.
> 
> Frank Prochaska
> 
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Wolf Creek total mass
> 
> Herbert Raab wrote:
> 
>>Bob WALKER writes:
>>
>>>Defintely WOLFE Creek with an e
>>>
>>>At least the Western Australian government and a map says so...
>>>they can't all be wrong can they hmmm
>>
>>
>>They can be wrong. The place may well be named Wolfe Creek (with "e"),
>>but the meteorite is oficially named Wolf Creek (without "e").
>>Wolfe Creek is not even registered as a synonym.
> 
> 
> I guess that's a bit like the official NomCom misspelling of the Lake 
> "Okeechobee", FL meteorite, the meteorite incorrectly spelled Okechobee, 
> and no synonyms listed either. It makes you wonder how such a thing 
> occurred.
> 
> David