Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IC 3

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 delete‎. ✗plicit 05:33, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

IC 3 (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)

The galaxy has only been featured in a small number of databases and large scale surveys which don't provide significant commentary on the object, thus fails WP:NASTCRIT. C messier (talk) 14:12, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Astronomy-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:20, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination as it is not notable. ‹hamster717🐉› ^{(discuss anything!🐹✈️ • my contribs🌌🌠)} 15:18, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 15:01, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as non notable. It's difficult to search on the galaxy identifier because it turns up a lot of false positives (such as IC 310), but a check in SIMBAD didn't turn up any article titles that referenced "IC 3". Nor does it show up in astronomy books. A few astronomy web sites mention it briefly, but without any substantial discussion. Praemonitus (talk) 05:28, 2 July 2024 (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.