Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barnard object

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 keep. postdlf (talk) 00:47, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Barnard object[edit]

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

Don't believe that this merits an article of its own. Perhaps merge to dark nebulae? Gbawden (talk) 10:49, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and Move Think this is worthy of its own article, but should be moved from Barnard object to Barnard('s) catalogue or similar and constructed in the form of a list, similar to Messier's catalogue. Various sources exist, e.g. http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2001yCat.7220....0B and there are numerous hit on Google Scholar. SheffGruff (talk) 17:01, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, notable catalogue, but really should be moved, as mentioned above, to Barnard Catalogue, as the article is about the whole catalogue, not the objects in it. The topic itself though has coverage in many places though, search on Google Scholar. StringTheory11 (t • c) 18:44, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. —Mike moral ♪♫ 19:15, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I agree that this should be about the the catalog of Barnard objects and be renamed to Barnard Catalogue. In addition to the Harvard ref above, there is an an online version of A Photographic Atlas of Selected Regions of the Milky Way at the [Georgia Tech library], which has pictures of many of the nebulae in the catalog and some secondary commentary. Another secondary source is Lynds' 1962 reprint and commentary on the catalog at [1]. There are many more sources on GScholar. Multiple reliable sources and availability of secondary sources makes this topic notable and the article, although but a short stub, should be kept. --Mark viking (talk) 20:41, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List_of_dark_nebulae#Barnard_objects. Don't oppose creating Barnard Catalogue, either. Ansh666 22:01, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or merge, but AfD is not really for such discussions. Bearian (talk) 20:18, 11 June 2013 (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.