Talk:Great refractor

Article title

Great refractor telescope would be a more immediately comprehended title.--Wetman (talk) 01:14, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Synthesis?

This article contains no references in its introduction to support any of the statements that this was an "age", or a separate "style", or a "phenomenon". There is not even a referenced basic def as to what a "Great refractor" is. Reading through the reference the closest def I can come up with is a "Great refractor" is simply the largest refractor at a given observatory. This separates it from other instruments found there such as the transit telescope, and the astrograph, and goes hand in hand with other observatory terminology such as the equatorial room, the "transit room", etc. So we may have too much synthesis here re: the definition and claims made in the article. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 21:08, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image caption

The image of Percival Lowell states, "Percival Lowell observing Venus during daylight hours from the observer's chair of the 61-centimeter (24-inch) Alvan Clark refracting telescope in Flagstaff, Arizona." However, most references I can find, and indeed the title of the image on Commons, claim that he is observing Mars, not Venus. Of course Mars cannot be viewed during daylight hours, and the scene is certainly well lit. Then again, Venus is usually observed close to the horizon around sunrise or sunset, not high in the sky. Moreover, if this picture was taken during daylight hours, the lack of sharp shadows suggests that it would have to have been an overcast day - not exactly the ideal conditions for observing, let's say. Given the (admittedly tenuous) evidence I'm going to change the caption, but I'd be interested to know what anyone else knows about the circumstances of this photograph, which I've lovingly cleaned today. Regards, nagualdesign (talk) 04:12, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Venus is very bright so it is a daytime object (not simply observed close to the horizon around sunrise or sunset) and Lowell was a Venus observer as well as a Mars observer[1]. So my guess would be this is either Lowell observing Venus high in the sky during the daytime to see maximum detail, or it is a publicity still and he is not looking at anything. It would be very unlikely he is looking at Mars (although it could be seen in the daytime as well, but would be washed out looking). Haven't found a definitive description yet.Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 16:54, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for looking into it. (Li'l telescope humour for you there.

) nagualdesign (talk) 21:48, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Some scoping ;) - Many sources come up on it being Venus with what looks like the earliest caption at 1928 [2][3][4][5]. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 01:42, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well observed. Although I only see the image on the last two links that you provided. Maybe I missed something on the first two links? Also, in the interest of balance I did a similar Google Books search for "percival lowell" "observing mars" and turned up these results: [6][7]. The second link is of particular interest as the text states that Percival Lowell "built an observatory in Flagstaff, Arizona Territory, for the purpose of observing Mars." Several other sources make the same claim. Not that that precludes him from making other observations of course! (~~PLuto was later discovered using the very same telescope.~~) Although one source claims that he "establish[ed] an observatory in Arizona and dedicate[d] the last fifteen years of his life to observing Mars." The plot thickens! I've taken the liberty of writing to the Lowell Observatory to see if they can 'shed some light' on the problem. Perhaps an RfC might draw in some knowledgeable Wikipedians? nagualdesign (talk) 04:43, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Although Lowell built the telescope for Mars he is also famous (imfamous?) for his "spokes on Venus"[8][9], observations made with the same telescope. The [10] 1928 source does not show the image in Google snippet but the description - "daytime" and "2 foot" (24") - could only be one image I know of, the one in question. This source[11] goes into detail description of the photo on page 35, attributing Venus. This source[12] attributes Venus and, at 1980, gets us back before WP:MIRROR. I have edited the caption ("Mars" is a very unlikely subject in this image) and expanded the description at the Commons page. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 14:33, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

At the Lowell Observatory Archives[13] searching the CORRESPONDENCE ARCHIVES for "Lowell Venus daytime" brings up "22- image" "22- Lowell observing Venus during the daytime". Seems to be the only "daytime" image in the collection. I would guess the attribution is written on the photo somehow. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 18:12, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's pretty compelling evidence. I'm going to request that the image title be changed on Commons. Thanks for all the hard work. nagualdesign (talk) 22:43, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed the caption back to Venus, given the evidence. Check out the comment at the bottom of this page too. nagualdesign (talk) 23:02, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Now that we've got that settled I've submitted the image as a Featured Picture Candidate as I believe it's the best version of this image (possible the best image of Percival Lowell) on the Internet. Sounds egotistical, I know, but it's the only image I've ever FPC'd and I challenge you to find one better!

nagualdesign (talk) 00:24, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As noted in the FPC discussion, the date of this image has been confirmed as 1914 by the Lowell Observatory Archives, who possess the original 5" x 7" plate glass negative. nagualdesign (talk) 01:39, 23 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Great refractor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:12, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Great refractor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120308055649/http://science.jrank.org/pages/49339/observatory.html to http://science.jrank.org/pages/49339/observatory.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 03:24, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]