Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/HD 204941

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Sandstein 10:56, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

HD 204941

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NASTRO and WP:GNG. For the four main criteria in WP:NASTCRIT, it is neither naked eye, nor in a catalogue of high historical importance, nor a subject of multiple non-trivial works, nor discovered before 1850. It is mentioned as one of a small number of objects in its discovery paper, and as one of a large number of objects in quite a few other papers. Non-technical coverage is virtually non-existent, although I did find an astrology blog referring to the planet (!). Lithopsian (talk) 14:04, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Astronomy-related deletion discussions. ~ Amkgp 💬 14:42, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I suspect an arbitrary and excessive usage of WP:NASTCRIT by Lithopsian, as questioned at User_talk:Trurle#Deletion_discussion_about_HD_204941. References for HD 204941 are good quality and article contain useful information compiled from at least 3 independent papers, even if not counting astronomical databases. Formally, i.m.h.o. deletion proposal falls to Wikipedia:Overzealous_deletion#Article_quality case. Trurle (talk) 21:25, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom; only one reference [1] has non-trivial/database coverage. power~enwiki (π, ν) 04:56, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This fails the criteria in WP:NASTRO: it does not appear that there is significant commentary on this object in multiple, non-trivial published works aside from inclusion in catalogs and surveys. Aldebarium (talk) 19:44, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and above, only one reference can be found, generally not notable, but especially fails WP:NASTRO. Footlessmouse (talk) 19:15, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.