Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1702 Kalahari (2nd nomination)


 * 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 merge to List of minor planets/1701–1800. Black Kite (talk) 11:31, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

1702 Kalahari
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Hoping for greater participation this time so we can get a consensus; will inform Wikiproject.This does have mentions in articles and databases, but they do not add up to WP:GNG or WP:NASTRO. As this has been sitting tagged for notability for over 3 years, it could really do with a consensus being reached. Pinging,. and  also participated in last (very recent) AfD. Boleyn (talk) 08:47, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep - per past astronomy consensus I believe they chose to keep asteroid/minor planets up to number 4000 (or possibly only 2000). This makes it either way. Plus the last discussion on many many such bodies less than two weeks ago was withdrawn. Many had chosen to keep but several had said that dealing with just one or just a few was ridiculous when there are hundreds of thousands of these minor planets. Fyunck(click) (talk) 09:11, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment The consensus was not to keep those up to 2000, but to individually assess those up to 2000. Dealing with one or two is not an issue (all of them will eventually be looked at) and WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a valid argument in an AfD. The recent discussion you mention (one of many recent discussions, which include those redirected) was withdrawn, it is really difficult to assess that number of asteroids in one AfD, so it was understandabley withdrawn. None of your comments, are about how this meets WP:NASTRO or WP:GNG. Boleyn (talk) 09:15, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Merge to suitable list- this article contains literally no information that could not be included in a table of similar asteroids. This information would be better presented as a multi-column table containing orbital parameters of asteroids. Diluting information over a multitude of microstubs like this is the worst way to present it. Reyk  YO!  09:39, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment List of minor planets/1701–1800 is the most appropriate merge/redirect title, although I think only a redirect is really needed. Boleyn (talk) 09:43, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
 * That table does not contain orbital elements, which I would like to see preserved. Though looking at the list now, including all those extra columns would cause it to run off the right edge of the screen. I wonder if it would be possible to include the asteroid infobox, which is now in the article, in the list in collapsible bits for each asteroid? That might be the best way. Reyk  YO!  09:51, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:55, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
 * Redirect per WP:NASTRO. I was unable to find any research that provides non-trivial detail about this object. At first I thought there was an entire publication about it but on closer examination it looks like just an entry in a database that someone once saw a need to cite individually. —David Eppstein (talk) 03:20, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 19:05, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Weak Redirect per WP:DWMP: While it was the subject of a light curve study, and is mentioned in a few scholarly journal articles, there is insufficient coverage to establish notability. Praemonitus (talk) 16:30, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
 * 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.