Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/HD 44385

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. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 21:48, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

HD 44385[edit]

[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. Below naked-eye visibility, not named in the pre-photographic era, not in any suitably historic catalogues, and very lacking in journal papers. The exoplanet is a candidate still unconfirmed. Lithopsian (talk) 19:37, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Astronomy-related deletion discussions. Lithopsian (talk) 19:37, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I don't see any convincing arguments or evidence to delete this article. Just because it's a candiate doesn't mean it needs to be deleted. 400Weir (talk)

But even if it was a confirmed exoplanet how would that make its parent star notable? Surely by now it is recognised that certainly very many, probably most and possibly very nearly all stars have planetary systems? Phil Bridger (talk) 17:17, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This is a pretty clear WP:NASTRO fail. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 23:23, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Agree it fails WP:NASTRO. PianoDan (talk) 22:00, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Clearly non-notable. Tercer (talk) 18:30, 8 April 2021 (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.