Talk:3451 Mentor

So many lightcurve times references on the sidebar :-o
OK, so, more sources are generally a good thing, but do we really need that many seeing as the vast majority say very nearly the same thing and they're cluttering the place up a bit? I'm pretty certain at least three of them are essentially duplicates, cited from papers that transclude data from one of the other cited works but round it off to a lower accuracy in the process (eg 7.606 +- 0.019 becoming 7.61 +- 0.02 and the like), giving a falsely inflated sense of consensus by their inclusion here. Would maybe the 8 to 10 most recent measurements suffice? 146.199.0.203 (talk) 23:27, 11 March 2018 (UTC)