Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1396 Outeniqua

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 redirect to List of minor planets: 1001-2000. (non-admin closure) –Davey2010^Talk 00:22, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

1396 Outeniqua

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

Doesn't meet WP:NASTRO or WP:GNG. I think it should be deleted; or (per NASTRO) redirected to List of minor planets: 1001-2000. Boleyn (talk) 06:21, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 21:16, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect. One group lightcurve study [1] but it's not enough. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:05, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Davewild (talk) 07:05, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect per WP:DWMP: insufficient source material available to establish notability. Does not satisfy WP:GNG guidelines. Praemonitus (talk) 22:05, 16 June 2015 (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.