Talk:Meteor shower

message: Why did meteor showers start in the 1800's? seriously. the earliest recorded meteor shower was 1799 according to history.com... weve been watching the sky as a people for millenia, doesnt it give anyone else a little bit of an unsettled feeling knowing that meteor showers just started not too long ago?
spoooky...  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.185.6.229 (talk) 21:15, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: *"From earliest times, humankind..."
Wow. That cliché has been there for two years and no one complains? Melchoir 00:46, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, the encyclopedic policy and tone are a little dry and rejectingly aloof, so nobody complains! Rursus 11:09, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Unencyclopedic tone

message: Oofis (talk) 17:39, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of Yahoo Answers 

message: could someone figure out if the image/description here is ok copyright for wikipedia? It's just so good but I generally find copyright issues confusing - see http://www.spitzer.caltech.edu/Media/releases/ssc2005-04/ssc2005-04a.shtml --Smkolins 04:51, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  photo of a trail 

message: Quadrantids and South Delta Aquarids are connected to 96P/Machholz (?), but the end note says that the comet 96P/Machholz 2 AKA 1994o (???), autosmithereenized in 1994. But 96P/Machholz was discovered 1986, sez relevant article. What is then this 1994o stuff about? Rursus 11:09, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well from Comet Machholz it looks like the same discoverer for two comets with parts of these names and the former is the more famous. Going to Southern Delta Aquariids takes you to a citation which mentions 96P/Machholz specifically and not 1994o so it looks like we have a typo. --Smkolins 00:44, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Comet identity

message: ?spelling of Eta Aquariids. 
Eta Aquarids has a link125.238.100.74 22:51, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  link to Eta Aquarids 

message: Hi,
I don't get the connection. At least it took me more time to understand the sentence's idea than to understand what's happening. Maybe one could make it clearer that the dust that was put into a different orbit stays in that orbit for all time (when forgetting about afresh interaction with the earth). And that it has a different period now. And that the new orbit keeps hitting the earth orbit as it originated from there.
87.78.69.173 08:54, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''(like opening a curtain, with grains piling up at the beginning and end of the gap)'' 

message: How fast is the dust on the orbit? Just as fast as the comet? I think it needs to have the same speed (as a function of the place not the time). So I don't understand how the spreading over the orbit works, when this needs a different speed then the comet, and this means leaving the orbit?
But back to the question? I'd like to know how fast the dust is relative to earth speed. If the earth were much faster, one could see the meteors coming from the tangentialline to the orbit of the earth. Is that the case or is the speed of the comets higher?
JanCK 09:00, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  coming from the same point in the sky 

message: Comment moved from Talk:Meteor shower/Comments. Astronaut (talk) 13:02, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Radiant points 

message: In the notable showers section, describing the leonids is the title "King of Meteor Showers." Being suspicious of this title, I investigated the citation and this title comes from a remark of a single amateur individual with a website. This title, therefore, doesn't really qualify for inclusion in this article and I propose that it be cut. Any opposition? — al-Shimoni (talk) 20:08, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  "King of Meteor Showers" Very Questionable 

message: This article could use some more pictures.  All the pictures currently in the article are of comets.  There should be some pictures of meteor showers.  Would appreciate it if anyone could do this. --174.34.41.239 (talk) 21:33, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  More Pictures 

message: There is no mention of their magnitude or brightness. There are about 20 named showers listed, and occasionally they are in the news when should be the time to see them. I have never seen any of those, so how bright these actually are? Can these be seen with naked eye? At least today's news said nothing about needing binoculars. 82.141.72.175 (talk) 21:35, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know if there is magnitude scale for meteors, but the current Perseid shower is considered "one of the brightest and most prolific meteor showers of the year" according to one source. Obviously best viewed away from city lights and other light pollution, the current shower is unfortunately occurring at the same time of the Supermoon, and we can't do anything about that. --RacerX11 Talk to meStalk me  22:31, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

text: Magnitude is uses for individual "things" - stars, planets in the sky, that sort of thing. It is stretched sometimes to speak of the magnitude of a spread out thing like a galaxy or nebula. But the meteor shower is a drawn out event including many meteors. Individual meteors have a magnitude but the over all event just has descriptions of how impressive it is like Racerx11's comments highlight. Smkolins (talk) 17:43, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Magnitude 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Meteor shower. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.iltrails.org/leokin4.gif
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121008085151/http://www.imcce.fr/langues/en/ephemerides/phenomenes/meteor/predictions.php to http://www.imcce.fr/langues/en/ephemerides/phenomenes/meteor/predictions.php
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:29, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Meteor shower. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070630230010/http://trs-new.jpl.nasa.gov/dspace/bitstream/2014/19339/1/98-0663.pdf to http://trs-new.jpl.nasa.gov/dspace/bitstream/2014/19339/1/98-0663.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070307111316/http://www.meteorobs.org/maillist/msg14753.html to http://www.meteorobs.org/maillist/msg14753.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140327221352/http://www.columbia.edu/~alw2165/pesnell.pdf to http://www.columbia.edu/~alw2165/pesnell.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040602234256/http://amsmeteors.org/index.html to http://www.amsmeteors.org/index.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:39, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: The file  on Wikimedia Commons has been nominated for deletion. View and participate in the deletion discussion at the . Community Tech bot (talk) 22:08, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion 

message: Mention that currently the state of prediction science is not very precise. This often results in many people waiting around all night for events that do not occur. For instance they only see a couple meteors.
See also https://www.sciencefocus.com/space/how-do-we-predict-meteor-shower-intensity/ . Jidanni (talk) 12:40, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Current state of prediction science 

message: Many meteor showers are named after the Bayer designation of the nearest bright star, to distinguish multiple radiants in the same constellation.  This article, most (all?) individual shower articles in Wikipedia, and most literature capitalise the Greek letter (eg. Eta Aquariids).  However, see Template:Meteor showers, the main navbox for these pages, where the names have been changed to start with a lowercase letter (eg. eta Aquariids).  This has been done because of the usage in an IAU naming group (for example, see https://www.adsabs.harvard.edu/full/2006JIMO...34..127J).  The usage of a lowercase Greek letter is not explicitly described anywhere I could find, but the documents and web pages produced by the working group use it consistently.  What do you all think?  Lithopsian (talk) 15:57, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Meteor shower name case 

message: Been reading the article and in the second paragraph there's no references for the statements they are using. Where I can look for the work "Notes upon the astronomical theory of the falling stars"? Hamddan4 (talk) 22:26, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Doesn't the "Historical developments" section lack of references?