Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/HD 220766

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. RL0919 (talk) 19:37, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

HD 220766

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

HD 220766 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Wow, don't think I've ever seen a star with so little coverage, even in large database listings, so it fails WP:NASTRO. It is brighter than magnitude 6.5, which was a sort of get out of jail free card in the past, not so much now. Despite that, not listed in the Bright Star Catalogue so far as I can tell. Has a faint companion, same distance, don't know if they're gravitationally bound, doesn't look like anyone has ever published on it. I could probably find out some basic physical data from catalogues, but it is hard to imagine writing much about this star. Lithopsian (talk) 17:50, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Astronomy-related deletion discussions. Lithopsian (talk) 17:50, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Is there someplace where this information could be usefully merged? BD2412 T 20:14, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This star has an entry in List of stars in Aquarius, although it is not wikilinked and it is listed as "236 G. Aqr". Lithopsian (talk) 20:45, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as non-notable. It was created by blocked user CarloscomB and began life with fabricated data. Praemonitus (talk) 13:58, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. There do not appear to be any sources (in the article or from a search) describing this star specifically – only mentions among many thousands of other stars in large database. No indications of notability. ComplexRational (talk) 00:32, 16 June 2022 (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.