BookStop... I'd take issue with that on several levels. One: Rowling is undoubtedly a phenomenon, but a passing one. Within 20 years, her name is likely to be at best a footnote in literary history; two: because she has absolutely no connection to science, the above point will tend to have people who are learning about these things scratching their heads and asking "who the hell is this Rowling person, and why was she chosen when there are so many more deserving recipients for this honor who were or are connected to the sciences?"; three: it is buying into this cult of the personality regardless of merit, encouraging it in one area that should be minimizing such sensationalism in favor of genuine merit -- we're not talking a breakfast cereal here, we're talking about a celestial body.... dammit, that's putting her right up there with Clyde Tombaugh, the discoverer of Pluto ... and there is absolutely no way she deserves that kind of recognition! And four: the basic premise that this will interest kids in the sciences more is highly unlikely. It will be at best a piece of trivia for J. K. Rowling fans and quizzes, but will have absolutely no impact on the encouragement of science education, because there is no real connection. It is yet another mistaken attempt at grasping at popularity contest sort of reasoning, and history shows time and again that that is completely worthless in encouraging interest in science. It's ephemeral; whereas naming of these things should be weighed carefully, based on merit and placement in the history of science itself, not celebrities.
I've nothing against giving the woman her due, but this is as ridiculous as naming a supercollider (or a library) after George W. Bush!
