Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UDF 7556


 * 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. –  Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 02:23, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

UDF 7556

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No apparent significance, other than being an object on a long list of galaxies that can be seen in the Hubble telescope. I can't find a published paper that is specifically on this object, though it is briefly mentioned in two. Isambard Kingdom (talk) 14:26, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Astronomy-related deletion discussions. North America1000 06:48, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 16:24, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete or merge: (as with WP:AfD/UDF2) subject isn't notable alone but it could be merged into a list such as List of the most distant astronomical objects. Dr Strauss   talk  16:28, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

I agree with deletion, for this and other UDF objects that have individual articles unless they are more specifically noteworthy. The mere fact that a galaxy happened to be observed by Hubble isn't sufficient reason to consider it noteworthy. A database such as NED is better suited for containing basic data such as redshifts and magnitudes for all galaxies where such data are available. No reason to add this to a list of the most distant astronomical objects, because this galaxy is fairly nearby compared with current record holders for distance. Aldebarium (talk) 01:16, 20 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete. Fails all criteria of WP:NASTRO. Also, Aldebarium makes a good point about why WP shouldn't merely duplicate information from astronomical catalogues. Astro4686 (talk) 00:14, 21 January 2017 (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.