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 merge to List of stars in Equuleus. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:33, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Gliese 818[edit]

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

Doesn't seem to meet WP:NASTRO. StringTheory11 (t • c) 17:34, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:11, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect/Merge into List of stars in Equuleus per WP:NASTHELP. No suitable sources found to demonstrate notability. Praemonitus (talk) 20:33, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dusti^{*Let's talk!*} 00:27, 10 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dusti^{*Let's talk!*} 05:30, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect per Praemonitus. This object fails WP:NASTRO but redirects are cheap. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:21, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and leave redirect. This could go to a new article on K type stars. I think the constellation list is not the right place for a redirect as there is already too much detail for this. Normally the list of stars will link to more information, not a circular redirect. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:08, 19 August 2013 (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.