Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/S/2025 U 1

< Wikipedia:Articles for deletion | S
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 speedy keep‎. Schwede66 05:03, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

S/2025 U 1

edit

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

S/2025 U 1 (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)

First of all, the page was immediately created just as the moon was announced to be discovered and also, considering the announcement was made today, its not inherently notable per RECENTISM. shane (talk) 01:00, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment by author - I have no objections. But I do want to say that there's articles for a LOT of non-notable moons of planets, like S/2022 J 1, S/2022 J 2, and S/2022 J 3, which I think should all be redirected to their respective list articles. Unlike those aforementioned non-notable moons, S/2025 U 1 will be studied further by JWST to determine its properties (relationship with rings, color, composition, etc.) over the coming months and years, and especially when the discoverers publish a research paper about it. The fact that S/2025 U 1 will get follow-up studies makes it stand out from other (distant irregular) moons like S/2023 U 1, which have no (and will not get) follow up studies whatsoever since those do not have individual interest among astronomers as far as I know. Nrco0e (talk • contribs) 01:13, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy keep because criteria #3 (significant, non-trivial coverage) of WP:NASTRO is clearly passed - from quick WP:BEFORE search see e.g. NBC, Sky News, Scientific American. WP:RECENTISM is an explanatory essay, and unlike WP:NASTRO not an official notability guideline. Even still, the essay is designed to warn against "articles overburdened with documenting breaking news reports and controversy as it happens and articles created on flimsy, transient merits"". It is not a categorical prohibition on having an article about something recent; WP:N and WP:NASTRO govern in that regard and require only significant coverage in reliable sources. There is no enduring coverage requirement within criterion #3 of WP:NASTRO, and for good reason. Unlike some other areas of our notability policy that have enduring coverage criteria, a newly discovered moon within our galaxy is not going anywhere - it is clearly not captured by the spirit of the WP:RECENTISM essay. FlipandFlopped ㋡ 01:19, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Just to be clear here that S/2025 U 1 is about a moon of Uranus. It's not about earth's moon that our astronauts have already explored. So what if the article was created just as that moon was discovered? As for notability, I think there is room for a little leeway on that when it comes to space discoveries. — Maile (talk) 01:32, 20 August 2025 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/S/2025_U_1&oldid=1306872256"