Talk:Meggers (crater)

Untitled

From VfD:

This is a non-notable crater on the moon. The connection to its namesake is established here: List_of_craters_on_the_Moon and I don't see much point in copying the positional data from the primary source ( http://planetarynames.wr.usgs.gov/moon/mooncrat.html ) into an extra article; this could be put on List_of_craters_on_the_Moon too. For reference, a notable moon crater would be the Giordano_Bruno_crater. Ianb 21:47, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I don't really see the problem with this; it does contain more information than the table you reference (the fact that more information could be inserted into the table doesn't mean it will be); I'd venture that any named crater is by definition notable. Moreover, it sure doesn't hurt anything by being here or violate any policy. Keep. Jgm 22:46, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)

• • There's quite a lot of craters on the moon, aren't there? A page on its own telling you where it is.. well, if that information isn't in the List_of_craters_on_the_Moon, it should be. The crater doesn't need a page, although I think William Meggers probably does, he was a fairly notable spectroscopist. The crater named after him doesn't appear to be that notable. DeleteAverage Earthman 12:42, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)
• Articles on divots next? :-) Seriously, I actually think this should be a keep, even if it duplicates information. I understand that a redirect might take care of the issues, but having this as a placeholder for a future article with more depth, so to speak, about the crater is not, I think, fundamentally misleading or unhelpful. Geogre 13:49, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  • Future information? I may be being dense here, but how much more can we say at the moment about this specific crater? If all we have is name, position and size of these craters, that is best served in one table, rather than 40 stub articles. If the Chinese stick a base there in 30 years time, we can add it then... Average Earthman 17:59, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)
  • Concur- the named craters are few enough, and large enough, that they may well each merit their own entry when someone gets around to writing them. Keep. -FZ 18:02, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)

A slippery slope. Not only is there the Moon to consider, but there are many other bodies - especially Mercury, Venus, Mars and even the Earth - with millions of named and (as yet) unnamed craters. I'll abstain from voting, but not even my social life is dismal enough to get me started on such a project! Fire Star 22:12, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)

• Unless Meggers crater is notable for other than its location and size, I vote to delete. Such data are more conveniently and practically kept on a table. Denni☯ 05:04, 2004 Jul 25 (UTC)
• Well as a far-side crater it's very unlikely to receive much additional material in the near future. But there's a bunch of Lunar craters in the same category. Would it make sense to just have a page about the Moon's far side, with a table of features, and then link all the corresponding far side craters to that page? There's probably only going to be a few far side that ever get much attention in the next couple of decades. RJH 02:50, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

end moved discussion

Okay I have added a bunch more information concerning this crater. Not sure what else could be added until we actually go there. RJH 16:46, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)

• thanks, much appreciated. If anyone's got a spacecraft capable of heading in that direction and is looking for crew, count me in ;-). --Ianb 18:03, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)