Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gliese 146
Information in the article is just a listing of technical data. Sources on the SIMBAD pages show no special interest in this object - it was studied along with thousands of others in large-scale surveys. The main "reference" in this article is not a professional source. It's an artist's website, stacked with the previously available (from SIMBAD) technical specs. The 48 papers mentioned above will merely list this object as one of many. None of the papers (that I could tell) singled the object out for special scrutiny - except for perhaps the 1953 paper, in which this object was one of five studied. Nothing here indicates this object would pass , let alone . The one sentence of the article that attempts to establish notability shouldn't be an issue here: notability for astronomical objects is not inherited. Cheers
— User:Astrocog, 12:56, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:GNG||WP:NASTRO (Wikipedia:Notability)