Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RU Andromedae


 * 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. -- Ed (Edgar181) 17:08, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

RU Andromedae

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Although this article was dePRODded as being notable, I still do not believe it meets the notability guidelines. All search results in google scholar turned up only in large lists of objects, and the star obviously fails all the other criteria of WP:NASTRO. StringTheory11 (t • c) 02:13, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:15, 12 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep; it meets WP:NASTRO criteria 2, obviously, as the star is cataloged in the General Catalog of Variable Stars and has been given a variable star designation. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 20:31, 12 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep: I did find a few sources which provide some limited commentary specific to RU Andromedae (sometimes abbreviated as RU And. in the literature):, ; the Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada on several occasions published a paragraph on the star in its "Variable Star Notes" (e.g. , ). Admittedly the commentary is short and the papers are relatively elderly, but taken together, these do provide "significant commentary" per WP:NASTCRIT #3.  Factoring in the argument by Carlossuarez46 too, it seems to me that this star is notable.  --Mike Agricola (talk) 20:49, 12 March 2013 (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.