164Re: [vsx-dis] GCVS mistakes and multiple entries
- Jul 2, 2006Yes, I believe we should de-dupe VSX as as strenuously as possible.
Mr. Greaves objected in our earlier discussion on the subject,
worried that if one record said the range was 10.2-13.1 and one said
it was 10.1 - 13.2 that we had an impossible situation to resolve.
I'd rather delete one and let the other one get edited into
correctness than be paralyzed by these duplicates. There are tons and
tons of duplicates and folks as intelligent as y'all can de-dupe them
quite deftly, is my suspicion.
It is better to ask forgiveness than permission. Do what you think
should be done, Mr Otero!
On Jul 2, 2006, at 10:58 AM, Sebastian Otero wrote:
> When a star is in VSX only once with its GCVS data, we can revise
> it and the new elements appear updated in the detail sheet. Thus a
> wrong classification in the GCVS is fixed or improved.
> When two entries from different catalogues are present for a star,
> how do we know which one to choose?
> V803 and V504 Cen are two stars wrongly classified as RCB in the GCVS.
> There is a Downes entry for each of these CVs, but the GCVS data is
> wrong and still there.
> I think we should follow the same way as with the single entry
> stars and revise the GCVS data so the mistake is no longer there.
> Most of the GCVS stars wrongly classified will have other entries
> (ASAS, NSVS) so the mistakes could be there forever causing
- << Previous post in topic