Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WASP-22b
while it did receive significant coverage in two papers (see above), the author lists have a ''huge'' overlap so I do not think it qualifies as separate sources. That is quite a debatable view, and one could argue that two ''editors'' accepted it so it is after all independent publications. I prepared to !vote "weak delete" but checking  more closely I found ''For the purposes of this guideline, "independent" means independent of the scientist or scientists who discovered the object (...)'' - which makes it a clear-cut case, it seems
— User:Tigraan, 16:21, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:NASTCRIT (Wikipedia:Notability)