The result was no consensus. Cirt (talk) 16:55, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable astronomer. Sources are a self-published article and a database of asteroids, which violated WP:SYN, most ghits look like scrapes of our article. MBisanz talk 18:38, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I think he is notable enough. Even if not based on his discovering of minor planets. articles like this indicate he is a clearly notable figure in Japanese astronomy and is repsonsible for the development of observatories in the country in the 1960s and throughout his career. And he is currently the head of the one of Japan's major observatories and is the author of 9 books/papers in English sources, probably many more in Japanese. I'd say he is notable enough in his given field in Japan, google search indicates he has been active and made discoveries in observatories all over Japan. Also he is a member of the International Astronomical Union which while this doesn't indicate what he has done it shows that in the fields of astronomy he is globally considerered notable enough to gain membership. They don't give membership away to any old amateur as far as I know.. . But it is because he ia major controbutor to astronomical studies as Harvard University relates. Article needs expansion though beyond using a database with reliable publications. Dr. Blofeld White cat 18:43, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Um, did you look for potential sources? I've founded many reliable independent sources like the Japan Times . There are also like CSA listing of his publications on astronomical subjects with the Astronomical Society of Japan etc.... and the Japanese name search reveals more about the extent of his astronomical publications. Google scholar and books alone indicate this is not a nobody in this field. Dr. Blofeld White cat 19:29, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]