Talk:Comet McNaught

message: I know that space.com is calling it a great comet, but I don't think it fits the definition, at least not as defined in that article. Not only is there almost nothing about it in the mainstream media, very few people have seen it with their own eyes. The definition of a great comet is one that is so obvious it cannot escape notice even to the casual observer. This one, while very bright, is very small and too close to the Sun to gain casual notice, and is fading already. Many great comets in the past (typically Kreutz sungrazers) were easily visible in daylight and stretched across the sky, including this one on the list would seem to dilute it. Robogun 01:47, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This comet, however, seems to fit the definition. It is the brightest in 40+ years, making it the second brightest in 70+ years, after Ikeya-Seki which shone at mag. -7 - -17. As the comet had a close approach to the sun, it was visible in broad daylight. Daylight comets are rare, and thus should be considered great comets. AstroHurricane001(Talk+Contribs+Ubx) 13:35, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

text: I stand corrected, note that "Great Comet" is not an astronomical term and its definition is rather subjective. Robogun 00:51, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Great Comet?

message: Its currently very conspicuous. I just spotted it by accident whilst driving home towards the sunset, about 20 minutes after the sun went down. I live nearish to London if that helps anyone. --LiamE 17:11, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This could be one to watch, because it is already brighter than any star in the night sky! An image would be helpful, either a user's self-taken image, or a non-copyrighted image from another website. AstroHurricane001(Talk+Contribs+Ubx) 22:18, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Possibly, and since it may be quite close to the sun, maybe someone should add that it could be hard to see, because when the sun is close to setting, the comet would already be very low in the sky, so it's best viewed in a rural area. It may also be confused with Venus, and maybe it should be expected as about the same brightness as Sirius, because it is so low in the sunset skies. AstroHurricane001(Talk+Contribs+Ubx) 18:12, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I dont think it could be confused with anything at the moment. When I saw it yesterday I was driving and not even looking for it! It is VERY obviously a comet. --LiamE 20:26, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  So is it near the sun in say, Texas? Cause i went to check it out, but i couldn't see it. Omiks3 00:50, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You have to catch it immediately after the sun goes below the horizon. SchmuckyTheCat 02:02, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

text: It's already getting very close to the sun, and tonight may be your last chance to see it in the Northern hemisphere. If you have a telescope, you just might be able to find the comet's large coma and it's very long tail. If you use a telescope, and it's not too close to the sun, you might be able to trace the tail for 5-30 degrees! You need a clear view of the horizon and a clear western/southern sky. It's right next to Venus. I havn't seen it, but if you check SOHO, you might see it for today and the next few days, and it's expected to be even brighter than comet NEAT in 2003! I could provide a few external links to SOHO if you want so you can catch the comet live when it gets too close to the sun. AstroHurricane001(Talk+Contribs+Ubx) 13:31, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Visibility

message: The orbital data given seem to be incredibly precise. I checked the link and those numbers are indeed on there, but it's likely just an artifact of a computer calulation, not an exact measurement. For instance, the perihelion distance goes on for about fifteen decimal places. Do we really know the perihelion to within a tenth of a millimeter?
:We don't really know that, but those are the predictions from the NASA website. Sure, it could be off by a few metres, but since the source says that, it should be kept as that. People who don't think it is that precise could round off a few digits. The perihelion number should be kept as the source number, and if the source changes, then you could change it. AstroHurricane001(Talk+Contribs+Ubx) 13:40, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Info Box 

message: To all those who upload images of the comet: Please upload the images to the Commons, and put it in Category:Comet McNaught. Thank you! --Vesta 15:31, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please upload images to Commons 

message: Yes or no: Can this be seen from the northern hemisphere - lets say New York, for instance.  --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 12:12, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not any more, although it IS still visible just north of the equator. New York is way too far north, although it was visible from there a few weeks ago Modest Genius talk 17:25, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Uh, according to that link the declination will continue to become more southerly until at least the 8th Feb (which is as far as they are shown), at which point it is -56 degrees. Modest Genius talk 19:10, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question 

message: Is there any official news on the nucleus splitting? Its not at all uncommon for it to happen to comets that pass that close to the sun and the picture above on this page and nucleus.jpg on the main article certainly suggest it has in fact split. --LiamE 15:18, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No reports of that on any of the sites that are following the comet's progress. Can anyone from the southern hemi take a look at the head through a telescope and confirm this?Robogun 06:37, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nucleus splitting 

message: Could someone please explain why the tail of this comet appears to be curved? Is it just an
effect of our perspective? I thought that the tail of a comet blows away from the Sun.
Is it because the comet is moving very fast? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.98.217.173 (talk) 21:27, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's the dust tail which remains in the orbital path (& McNaught made a tight turn). The straight tail that points away from the Sun is the ion tail. Comets can have either or both depending on its composition, closeness to the Sun, tightness of the turn angle of view & other factors. The main Comet article has more detail. Robogun 06:20, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Curved tail 

message: Now, this is what WP is all about - common effort yields a good product, and real-time, instep with the event.  Self-organisation at its finest.  William R. Buckley 15:51, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Is it also about cramming as many images of the same thing as possible onto one page? 147.188.225.245 09:30, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Wow, this article (which I started) is now on the main page! Why is it semi-protected? We haven't really seen a lot of vandalism on this article. I guess the expansion of this article was mostly because of the current event it is. Also, it could be the brightest comet in 70 years to come within 0.15 AU of the sun and not split into pieces and not on the mainstream media. Keep up the good work! AstroHurricane001(Talk+Contribs+Ubx) 18:23, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

text: It's been on the front page of the BBC website, does that not count as mainstream media? http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_pictures/6251663.stm Modest Genius talk 19:14, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, I guess that is mainstream, but it only has one picture and a few words, and I don't see it on the front page. I was just wondering if anyone has mentioned it on TV< because it usually only has the "big" news. AstroHurricane001(Talk+Contribs+Ubx) 21:59, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, understandably enough, it was on the front page at a time when the thing was visible from here ;) Plus, that's a picture gallery, it has a whole bunch of pics (but yes, very few words). But yes, point taken, although I don't tend to watch many TV news bulletins so wouldn't notice even if it was on there Modest Genius talk 23:47, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Congratulations!!! 

message: I'll be in Sao Paulo tomorrow and i'd like to know if anyone knows any good spots in the area to see the comet? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.175.83.141 (talk) 19:03, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Somewhere with a view of the sky is probably your best bet 147.188.225.245 09:29, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  With all the light pollution in big cities you should probably head out o ftown to see it best. Arthurian Legend 15:40, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Actually, that shouldn't be nessecary. It is still about mag. -2, and in a big city like Sao Paulo, you should still be able to see to at least mag. 1, so the comet should be visible as long as it isn't cloudy and you go outside at the right time. AstroHurricane001(Talk+Contribs+Ubx) 18:39, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question 

message: Does anyone know its mass and physical size? Anthill2006 
It can only be guessed, without a close-up look at the nucleus. I haven't heard any estimates at all. Oh, and sign your posts, like me.--Planetary 20:13, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question 

message: On January 22nd, around 10:00pm AUST EST (Daylight Savings Time), the Comet could be clearly seen from Werribee, Victoria (30 minutes east of Geelong - 40 minutes west of the Melbourne CBD). Looking south. Truly, truly amazing - my house mates and I were the only people in my street to actually notice it.
Blackxbellax 12:16, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Visibility in Australia 

message: I mean in my life i have never seen a comet. It would be pretty cool if this one was fading into the northern hemisphere. If it is visible then it would be pretty cool to see it —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Harryjoebill (talk • contribs) 00:09, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I can relate to this. When it was "visible" here, a massive ICE STORM obscured it. Same happen to you ? Martial Law 04:49, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I did see the Hale-Bopp comet. Martial Law 04:50, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Im not complaining, sort of 

message: On 21 January, I tried to add uniform (UK style) to the dates mentioned in the article, and they were reverted. I may have screwed something up somewhere. But something still needs to be done about the dating format, as the article pitches between US and UK stylings, which just looks sloppy. ZincOrbie 00:51, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The article was started with US date format so it should standardise to that. --LiamE 00:58, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But it was an Australian astronomer (tongue in cheek - I don't really care)--Golden Wattle  talk 01:03, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If the dates are wikilinked then they should render according to your personal preferences regardless of how they are entered in the article. Zunaid©® 06:42, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Uniformity in dates

message: The faint tail of the comet is/was still visible to the naked eye in evening sky. I think this is about 2 weeks ? Amazing !!!! 
How Fast is this comet traveling approx at the moment ???? Might be interesting to put the speed range on the main page.Yendor72 02:37, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Still visible 25th Jan. Australia! (2 weeks)

message: In the image showing the comet's orbit (in green), which direction is the comet travelling? I am assuming clockwise because it had its perihelion on 12 Jan and the image shows its orbit on 14 Jan. Does anyone know for sure? Mikeeg555 06:15, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It orbits clockwise in the image, hence the southern hemisphere can see it longer than the northern. (North is up in the image.)--Geremia 17:09, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Orbit Direction?

message: The article claims it's visible in the mornings also.  I was wondering if anyone could give a general compass bearing to look at to spot it?  Evening viewing from Christchurch, New Zealand sucks at the moment due to the weather.  Mornings are generally patchy though. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.109.176.126 (talk) 16:31, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Morning Viewing?

message: Will Earth cross the comet's orbit resulting in a great meteor shower? From NASA link "Comet orbital elements and diagram" it appears Earth and comet orbits intersect in late June. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.159.147.143 (talk) 16:03, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Future Meteor Showers/Storms?

message: 1. Was it visible in North America
2. When will it be back  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.27.36.231 (talk) 02:42, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two things 

message: * Since there are many other comets also called "Comet McNaught", another of which (C/2009 R1) is starting get some attention, I suggest that this article should be moved back to C/2006 P1, and "Comet McNaught" should be used for the disambiguation page, which is currently Comet McNaught (disambiguation). cmadler (talk) 20:28, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article title/disambiguation 

message: Substituted at 04:52, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on C/2006 P1. 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/20111228014918/http://www.icq.eps.harvard.edu:80/brightest.html to http://www.icq.eps.harvard.edu/brightest.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:31, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on C/2006 P1. 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/20110218054618/http://www.perthobservatory.wa.gov.au/information/comet_mcnaught_info.html to http://www.perthobservatory.wa.gov.au/information/comet_mcnaught_info.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.icq.eps.harvard.edu/brightest.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) 09:28, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on C/2006 P1. 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/20070119092745/http://www.mso.anu.edu.au/~rmn/C2006P1.htm to http://www.mso.anu.edu.au/~rmn/C2006P1.htm
*Added  tag to http://p143.news.scd.yahoo.com/s/space/20070112/sc_space/thegreatcometof2007watchitontheweb
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070120141427/http://msowww.anu.edu.au/~rmn/C2006P1.htm to http://msowww.anu.edu.au/~rmn/C2006P1.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070119092745/http://www.mso.anu.edu.au/~rmn/C2006P1.htm to http://www.mso.anu.edu.au/~rmn/C2006P1.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080625083426/http://www.infectiousvideos.com/p/7858 to http://www.infectiousvideos.com/p/7858
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) 22:33, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: Pages moved. (closed by non-admin page mover)  Jerm (talk) 05:25, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 25 June 2021 

message: The first photograph of the gallery is captionned "Over Iceland on 9 January ". This is strange, as the lead section states that "(the comet) was easily visible to the naked eye for observers in the Southern Hemisphere in January and February 2007" but the whole article doesn't mention anything about possible visibility from the Norther Hemisphere, let alone from somewhere as far North as Iceland. All other pics in the gallery are captionned as pertaining to the Southern Hemisphere.
While composing this comment, I also find that there exists two files in Commons that somehow share the same handle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Comet_McNaught.jpg
* this one, which is the one in question here
* and that one, rather unremarkable and nondescript
I therefore motion that this photograph be removed from the article. Noliscient (talk) 11:54, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: As the comet looped around the Sun, it was briefly visible from the north hemisphere during the first half of January 2007, and it is mentioned in the article, in the second paragraph of the discovery sentence. But it was much more impressive when it became visible from the south hemisphere. C messier (talk) 05:38, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, my bad. Thank you. Noliscient (talk) 10:05, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Over Iceland on 9 January  ?