This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Astronomy: Astronomical objects This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.AstronomyWikipedia:WikiProject AstronomyTemplate:WikiProject AstronomyAstronomy articles This redirect is supported by WikiProject Astronomical objects, which collaborates on articles related to astronomical objects.

((Merge|HD 80607|HD 80606|Struve 1341|discuss=Talk:HD 80606#Merger with HD 80607 and Struve 1341|date=May 2009))

I think this article should be merged with the HD 80607 and Struve 1341 articles. Especially regarding the discussion of the Kozai mechanism, it makes sense to include discussion of HD 80607 in this article. Furthermore it is not typical Wikipedia convention to split multiple star topics across multiple articles. I'm not entirely sure what the merged article should be titled: while Struve 1341 is a name for the pair of stars, it does not seem to be used very much, nor do the system's other multiple star designations listed on SIMBAD (BDS 5037, IDS 09158+5102). It seems that this star is typically referred to as HD 80606, so maybe using HD 80606 and HD 80607 (currently a redirect to Struve 1341) would be more appropriate. Icalanise (talk) 20:27, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Neutral/Conditional Oppose - I am indifferent to merging the articles in principle, but I would oppose use of HD 80606 and HD 80607 as the target. Struve 1341 is the correct name, so should be used over a fabricated one. --GW… 23:08, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment if merged, I would prefer a system based designation instead of A and B. 76.66.201.179 (talk) 05:53, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose HD80686 and HD80607 appeal to different readers, because HD80606 has a very unusual transiting planet around it, while HD80607 is mostly used by astronomers as a control during HD80606 observations. In recent astronomical literature, that is how they've been refered to, so those are the most sensible names to use. Cwmagee (talk) 11:01, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • The question is whether it is preferable to split out the system and the secondary star as stub articles. As you say, there isn't particularly much about HD 80607 and what there is seems to relate primarily to its association with HD 80606. So what's the benefit of splitting it out? This is completely different to how pretty much every other multiple star system, including those which contain planets are treated. I'm not convinced HD 80607 is so independently notable that it needs its own separate article. Icalanise (talk) 13:00, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Students Find Jupiter-sized Oddball Planet
• Detection of a transit by the planetary companion of HD 80606

—RJH (talk) 19:08, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]