# விக்கிப்பீடியா:குறிப்பிடத்தக்கமை (வானியல் பொருட்கள்)



This guideline is meant to reflect consensus about the notability of வானியல்சார் பொருள்s. The guideline covers all significant physical entities, associations or structures that current அறிவியல் has confirmed to exist in outer space. The guideline does not cover topics relating to artificial structures in space, such as செயற்கைக்கோள்s, விண்கலம், விண்ணுளவிs, விண்வெளி நிலையம்s or விண்வெளி நோக்காய்வுக்கலம்s. It also does not cover terrestrial locations, airspace, or material that has been transported to the Earth's atmosphere or surface, including moon rocks, meteor showers and விண்வீழ்கல்s.  

Simply stated, an astronomical object is a body of matter (or collection of such bodies) that is bound together by a அடிப்படை விசைகள், has boundaries defined by large-scale structure (e.g. voids), or is a combined grouping through viewing perspective (e.g. இரட்டை விண்மீன்s). This includes galaxies, நெபுலாe, விண்மீன் கொத்துகள்s, star systems, individual விண்மீன்s, கோள்s, minor planets, சிறுகோள்s, வால்வெள்ளிs, and நிலாs. It can also include bodies of matter that are held together by masses other than their own, such as a circumstellar disk, accretion disc, or zodiacal dust.  

## Basic notability
### No inherent notability
Notable means "worthy of being noted" or "attracting notice". It is not synonymous with "fame" or "importance". Astronomical objects are notable if they have garnered a certain threshold of attention and analysis in the scientific literature and/or popular media. Famous astronomical objects are likely to have more readily available verifiable information from reliable sources that provide evidence of notability; however, more obscure objects can still be notable.  

Even if editors personally believe an astronomical object is "important" or "inherently notable", astronomical objects are only accepted as notable if they have attracted notice in reliable sources. The fact that an astronomical object is by itself not enough to support notability. There exists a perennial debate on Wikipedia about the notability of , with no clear consensus; in practice all named geographic features (mountains, rivers, hills) are notable enough for an article. Some editors have included astronomical objects in the blanket category of geographic features, with the result being that it is acceptable for individual astronomical objects to be part of a . This notability guideline does not alter that practice with respect to lists. However, unlike Earth-based geographic features, arbitrary astronomical objects are unlikely to be visited or run across by a general reader of Wikipedia. Therefore, unless an astronomical object has significant coverage in the media or published sources, the likelihood that a general reader would choose to search Wikipedia for an arbitrary astronomical object is quite low. This is not a matter of dubious predictions; it is just common sense. Therefore, unlike Earth-based geographic features, the existence of an astronomical object, or even the fact that it has been named (see below) does not guarantee notability.  

### No inherited notability
In the sense that an object has been discovered or observed, it may have been noted by a scientist or scientists. For the purposes of this guideline, *notable* means having attracted significant notice in the spirit of விக்கிப்பீடியா:குறிப்பிடத்தக்கமை. No astronomical object is exempt from this requirement, no matter what kind of object it is. If the individual object has received no or very little notice from , then it is not notable even though astronomical objects of its type are commonly notable. Also, just because the object is listed by name in a paper does not ensure notability. An object may be on the observation list of a large-scale survey, or a study of many objects of a specific type. Unless the astronomical object is the primary, or one of the primary, targets of a study, then such a study should not be used to support the object's notability.  

Likewise, just because an object is listed in a database does not mean it is notable. Some databases and surveys, such as the JPL Small-Body Database or the Sloan Digital Sky Survey list hundreds of thousands or millions of objects (respectively). Other databases concern themselves with specific classes of objects and have fewer entries. Several, if not most, of the listed objects have little information beyond their physical parameters and discovery circumstances. It is not the job of Wikipedia to needlessly duplicate content in these databases. Likewise, just because, for example, a minor planet has been named by the Committee for Small-Body Nomenclature, this does not necessarily mean that object is notable. Unless the object has been the subject of *significant commentary* or *significant study* (i.e. beyond discovery and initial parameter constraints), it probably does not warrant an article.  

This guideline does not prohibit the creation or maintenance of list articles that contain tables of properties and information related to astronomical objects. However, such lists are still subject to Wikipedia's content policies, such as verifiability and no original research.  

## Criteria

If an astronomical object meets *any* of the following criteria, supported through *independent* , it probably qualifies for a stand-alone article. If an astronomical object meets of these criteria, it *may* still be notable, provided it meets the conditions of விக்கிப்பீடியா:குறிப்பிடத்தக்கமை, though the merits of an article about an astronomical object will rest primarily on material that is verifiable through independent sources.  

1. The object is, or has been, visible to the naked eye. For ordinary stars, this includes any object with an HR catalogue identifier.
1. The object is listed in catalogues of interest to amateur astronomers (e.g. மெசியே பொருள், Caldwell catalogue), or a catalogue of high historical importance (e.g. புதிய பொதுப் பட்டியல்). Being listed in comprehensive databases and surveys such as 2MASS or 2dFGRS isn't enough for notability.
1. The object has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial published works. This includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, books, television documentaries and articles in peer-reviewed scientific journals. A single paper is not enough to establish notability for most objects. Being mentioned alongside other similar objects, such as in a table of properties of 200 newly discovered supernovae, does not constitute non-trivial coverage; the paper needs to have *significant commentary* on the object.
1. The object was discovered before 1850, prior to the advent of stellar astrophotography or automated technology. (The first asteroid discovered photographically was 323 Brucia in 1891.)

For the purposes of this guideline, "independent" means independent of the scientist or scientists who discovered the object, or others who may have a conflict of interest in promoting the object. The guideline does not prohibit the use of sources generated by the primary researchers, but they are not sufficient to establish notability.  

Although some objects might qualify for a standalone article based on this guideline alone, it may still be best to create redirects to a more general article. For example, it might be best to consolidate the information about the individual planets of a planetary system on the article about its parent star. Whether it is best to consolidate or to have individual articles should be determined on a case-by-case basis, on the relevant article's talk page.  

**Note 1:** These criteria do not supersede விக்கிப்பீடியா:குறிப்பிடத்தக்கமை, they merely supplement and clarify it within the context of astronomical objects. If an astronomical object does not meet the general notability guideline, especially if it lacks evidence of significant coverage in independent, reliable sources, then it risks being merged or redirected to an existing article, or deleted altogether.  

**Note 2:** Per விக்கிப்பீடியா:தானியங்கி கொள்கை, the systematic creation of articles on astronomical objects based on information retrieved from various astronomical databases should be discussed at WT:ASTRO first.  

**Note 3:** Hypothesized or candidate astronomical objects may be notable if they have been subject to multiple, independent reliable sources that attest to their notability. Owing to விக்கிப்பீடியா:தமிழ் விக்கிப்பீடியா இவை அன்று, it is irresponsible for Wikipedia to promote a hypothesized or candidate object as actually existing before confirmation by reliable sources. As with criterion 2 above, the mere fact that an astronomical object has been hypothesized to exist or has been included in comprehensive source catalogs of candidate objects is not enough to confer notability.  

## Failing all criteria
If no criteria can be met for either a standalone article or inclusion in a more general article, and improvements have not worked or cannot be reasonably tried, then there are two deletion procedures to be considered:  

}}