# Star names and the HYG Database

WARNING: I'm a noob in astronomy.

After import all stars from HYG Database (http://www.astronexus.com/node/34) I noticed some missings:

1) NGC catalog seems to have other names ( maybe Gliese )

2) Some stars have catalog names when could have simple (commom) names ('Mimosa' is 'Bet Cru').

In fact, I think the HYG Database is too professional ( select count(*) from hygn where proper_name is not null gives me only 87 stars) and keep the stars names more scientific.

Is there another database like HYG Database I can try?

-

What about BSC5p for stars brighter than magnitude 6.5? The "alt_name" "is usually the Flamsteed and/or Bayer constellation-based name for the star".

Here a list of more advanced catalogs.

Here a list of some common star names for Hipparcos numbers. Probably not much different from your query result.

On Wikipedia a probably more complete list of more or less wide-spread common star names.

Those common names often are not unique, and not all common names are widely accepted. That's probably why they aren't provided in the star catalogs.

The only way I could imagine to get a solution is to convert the Wikipedia table to a csv file, and to import it to a database table used as a relation from the various catalog names to the proper names. That will probably need quite a bit of manual work.

None of the naming systems is complete, not even necessarily unique. Stars frequently turn out to be not one, but several stars, or no star at all. At some point it's easier to use 'scientifics'.

-
I can't find any I can download and import to PostgreSQL. (CSV like HYG Database). –  Magno C Jan 30 '14 at 14:32
Did you try 4. / Output Format / Excel compatible ? –  Gerald Jan 30 '14 at 14:42
Yeap. Their names are still 'scientifics' and some cases even doesn't exists. HYG Database uses Hipparcos data. –  Magno C Jan 30 '14 at 15:37
The Wikipedia list is what I'm looking for. I want to find Alniyat and not Tau Sco, for example. –  Magno C Jan 30 '14 at 15:46
Those common names often are not unique, and not all common names are widely accepted. That's probably why they aren't provided in the star catalogs. The only way I could imagine to get a solution is to convert the Wikipedia table to a csv file, and to import it to a database table used as a relation from the various catalog names to the proper names. That will probably need quite a bit of manual work. None of the naming systems is complete, not even necessarily unique. Stars frequently turn out to be not one, but several stars, or no star at all. At some point it's easier to use 'scientifics' –  Gerald Jan 30 '14 at 16:07