[meteorite-list] Met Bulletin Updates - 2 NWA's and a Nova, and a Question regarding Nomenclature

[Jim Wooddell]

Hi Mike and all!

3.4 Meteorites of unknown or poorly known provenance.

  (a) Withheld information. Where the source of a new meteorite cannot be 
determined due to the withholding of geographic information by a collector 
or other party, the name should be chosen to reflect the smallest geographic 
feature identifying the collection location with certainty. If the location 
information is too vague, or is uncertain or disputed, the name Nova 
followed by the next available three-digit number should be adopted as the 
permanent name.

  (b) Transported meteorites. When the provenance of a new meteorite cannot 
be determined due to a lack of sufficient historical information, it should 
be named after the locality where it was first recognized. For meteorites 
found in institutions such as universities and museums, the name may be 
either that of the institution, the collection, or the city in which the 
institution is located. In accordance with§3.6, the names of people, even if 
part of the official name of the collection, should be avoided.

  (c) Meteorites found in large numbers. In cases where many meteorites are 
found and distributed or sold without careful documentation of provenance, a 
numbered sequence of generic names should be used as in §3.3c, wherein the 
prefix reflects the geographic area in which the meteorites were most likely 
recovered (e.g., Northwest Africa, for meteorites coming from marketplaces 
in Morocco).



  That might help answer your questions.








----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Michael Gilmer" <meteoritemike at gmail.com>
To: <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
Sent: Friday, April 20, 2012 9:20 AM
Subject: [meteorite-list] Met Bulletin Updates - 2 NWA's and a Nova,and a 
Question regarding Nomenclature


> Greetings Bulletin Geeks,
>
> There are 3 new approvals today.  Two NWA's - a CK5 and L5.  And one
> new "Nova" find - an iron from Russia.
>
> Question - it has been my understanding that Nova names are reserved
> for those meteorites with dubious location data.  So, why is it that
> many of the Labenne finds have not been renamed as Nova finds?  And
> this new Russian iron seems to have find data similar to the majority
> of NWA's, so why aren't more NWA's classified as Novas?  Is it because
> there are just too many NWA's?
>
> http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meteor/metbull.php?sea=&sfor=names&ants=&falls=&valids=&stype=contains&lrec=50&map=ge&browse=&country=All&srt=name&categ=All&mblist=All&rect=&phot=&snew=1&pnt=Normal%20table&dr=&page=0
>
> Best regards,
>
> MikeG
>
> -- 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> Galactic Stone & Ironworks - MikeG
>
> Web: http://www.galactic-stone.com
> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/galacticstone
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/GalacticStone
> RSS: http://www.galactic-stone.com/rss/126516
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> ______________________________________________
>
> Visit the Archives at 
> http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list