| Revision as of 14:34, 12 February 2022 editMalnadachBot (talk | contribs)11,637,095 editsm Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)Tag: AWB← Previous edit | Revision as of 09:01, 20 March 2022 edit undoMalnadachBot (talk | contribs)11,637,095 editsm Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)Tag: AWBNext edit → | ||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
| :({{Find sources AFD|1361 Leuschneria}}) | :({{Find sources AFD|1361 Leuschneria}}) | ||
| DOesn't meet ] or ]. Should be deleted; or (preferably) redirected to ] per NASTRO. ] (]) 19:41, 14 May 2015 (UTC) ] (]) 19:41, 14 May 2015 (UTC) | DOesn't meet ] or ]. Should be deleted; or (preferably) redirected to ] per NASTRO. ] (]) 19:41, 14 May 2015 (UTC) ] (]) 19:41, 14 May 2015 (UTC) | ||
| :<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the ]. <span class="smallcaps" style="font-variant:small-caps;">]<sup>]</sup></span> 23:15, 14 May 2015 (UTC)</small> | :<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the ]. <span class="smallcaps" style="font-variant:small-caps;">]<sup>]</sup></span> 23:15, 14 May 2015 (UTC)</small> | ||
| *'''Unsure'''. The main subject of two old orbital studies , used as one of two examples in a paper about a method for calculating orbits , and mentioned more recently as a candidate for a certain orbital resonance (but found not to be in that resonance) . This last reference also cites a book chapter by Williams (1979) where its candidacy for the resonance was first proposed. Is it enough? —] (]) 07:12, 15 May 2015 (UTC) | *'''Unsure'''. The main subject of two old orbital studies , used as one of two examples in a paper about a method for calculating orbits , and mentioned more recently as a candidate for a certain orbital resonance (but found not to be in that resonance) . This last reference also cites a book chapter by Williams (1979) where its candidacy for the resonance was first proposed. Is it enough? —] (]) 07:12, 15 May 2015 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Keep''': WP:NASTRO is merely a guideline and should not be used to remove borderline asteroids as the the main-belt asteroid problem was created by bots and should not be over corrected. It would be better if borderline asteroids were actually dealt with by the Astro project. -- ] (]) 11:58, 17 May 2015 (UTC) | *'''Keep''': WP:NASTRO is merely a guideline and should not be used to remove borderline asteroids as the the main-belt asteroid problem was created by bots and should not be over corrected. It would be better if borderline asteroids were actually dealt with by the Astro project. -- ] (]) 11:58, 17 May 2015 (UTC) | ||
| :{|cellpadding=0 style="border: 1px solid #A3A3A3; background-color: #FFFFFF" align=left width=auto | :{|cellpadding=0 style="border: 1px solid #A3A3A3; background-color: #FFFFFF" align=left width=auto | ||
| |<span style="font-size:89%;">'''] {{color|#FF7216|to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}</span>'''<br />''' | |<span style="font-size:89%;">'''] {{color|#FF7216|to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}</span>'''<br />''' | ||
| <span style="font-size:84%;">Please add new comments below this notice. <span class="smallcaps" style="font-variant:small-caps;">]<sup>]</sup></span> 08:46, 21 May 2015 (UTC)</span><!-- from Template:Relist --></div> | <span style="font-size:84%;">Please add new comments below this notice. <span class="smallcaps" style="font-variant:small-caps;">]<sup>]</sup></span> 08:46, 21 May 2015 (UTC)</span><!-- from Template:Relist --></div> | ||
| |}{{-}}<!-- Please add new comments below this line --> | |}{{-}}<!-- Please add new comments below this line --> | ||
| <div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"><span style="color: #FF6600;">'''{{resize|91%|] to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}'''</span><br /> | <div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"><span style="color: #FF6600;">'''{{resize|91%|] to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}'''</span><br /> | ||
Revision as of 09:01, 20 March 2022
- 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 no consensus. Davewild (talk) 17:31, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
1361 Leuschneria
- 1361 Leuschneria (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
DOesn't meet WP:NASTRO or WP:GNG. Should be deleted; or (preferably) redirected to List of minor planets: 1001–2000 per NASTRO. Boleyn (talk) 19:41, 14 May 2015 (UTC) Boleyn (talk) 19:41, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. North America 23:15, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
- Unsure. The main subject of two old orbital studies , used as one of two examples in a paper about a method for calculating orbits , and mentioned more recently as a candidate for a certain orbital resonance (but found not to be in that resonance) . This last reference also cites a book chapter by Williams (1979) where its candidacy for the resonance was first proposed. Is it enough? —David Eppstein (talk) 07:12, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
- Keep: WP:NASTRO is merely a guideline and should not be used to remove borderline asteroids as the the main-belt asteroid problem was created by bots and should not be over corrected. It would be better if borderline asteroids were actually dealt with by the Astro project. -- Kheider (talk) 11:58, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. North America 08:46, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Davewild (talk) 19:50, 28 May 2015 (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.