Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IC 3038


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Liz Read! Talk! 07:14, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

IC 3038

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

The galaxy has only been featured in a small number of databases and large scale surveys which don't provide significant commentary on the object, thus fails WP:NASTCRIT. C messier (talk) 12:17, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Astronomy-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:49, 30 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Delete. ‹hamster717🐉› (discuss anything!🐹✈️ • my contribs🌌🌠) 01:47, 1 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Delete: non-notable galaxy. I didn't see any significant coverage in scholarly studies or observer's guide books. Praemonitus (talk) 14:55, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete: does not appear developable now nor in the near future.  ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  15:18, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete: The article doesn't have a lot of substance. This galaxy seems pretty obscure, and I couldn't find much written about it.  Waqar 💬 17:14, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete: As a creator of this article, I don't see a chance for it to be kept even longer due to the scarcity of secondary sources available for the galaxy except being covered in databases. It's hard to say whether this galaxy is notable, but it isn't. Should it be given more commentary, then this article can be recreated in the future. Galaxybeing (talk) 04:13, 7 July 2024 (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.