This article was nominated for deletion on 23 April 2015. The result of the discussion was redirect to List of minor planets: 1001–2000.

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Astronomy: Astronomical objects / Solar System Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.AstronomyWikipedia:WikiProject AstronomyTemplate:WikiProject AstronomyAstronomy articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Astronomical objects, which collaborates on articles related to astronomical objects. This article is supported by Solar System task force (assessed as Low-importance).

I do not understand this tag, especially after reading the Wikipedia:Notability_(astronomical_objects)#Dealing_with_minor_planets guideline. This object may not have "many" follow-up studies, but it has got enough ones as the link to NASA's page shows. Furthermore, right now it has got abundant technical data, a name and a little story behind, not to mention the fact that it can be expanded any time (though "any time" seems to mean "eons-long time" in an impatient person's calendar). It may not be a very prominent article but I fail to see what this project or its users would gain by simplifying the content into a redirect link to the main list of asteroids or just deleting it. Maybe just space? Would that make up for the loss/concealing of data and history log? I just hope this kind of tagging is not as wide-spread as I surmise it actually might be: I personally find it unnecessary and sad because Wikipedia is supposed to help spread knowledge, not constrain it. -- 87.217.184.134 ( talk) 15:34, 4 March 2012 (UTC) reply

The tagging was done in response to a request. If you wish, you are free to remove the tag - though I think it needs more than two sentences to justify why it's notable. ^Avic _ennasis @ 17:06, 10 Adar 5772 / 17:06, 4 March 2012 (UTC) reply

Obviously there are more things than two sentences. The info in the box and the contextualization in "Minor planets navigator" do not seem negligible info to me. -- 87.217.184.134 ( talk) 19:43, 4 March 2012 (UTC) reply

As an author or NASTRO, I find it somewhat shameful that Chrisrus is spreading so much Wikipedia:I just don't like it. He simply has an agenda to remove as many main-belt astro-stubs as he can. Asteroids numbered below ~3000 should not be aggressively targeted since they are easily observed by amateurs with small telescopes. Make a honest guide and there will always be someone in the group that will try to take advantage of it. -- Kheider ( talk) 08:30, 21 March 2012 (UTC) reply