The result was keep. No arguments for deletion aside from the nominator and 1 "incubate" suggestion. The issue of merging can be discussed on the article's talk page. ( non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman ( talk) 02:31, 6 June 2010 (UTC) reply
This seems to be a borderline neologism. A google search of "eccentric jupiter" returns 42 hits, most of which are not used in the manner of "eccentric Jupiter" as a term, but rather "an eccentric Jupiter-like planet" or something similar. For this reason, an exact definition does not seem to exist. The article uses e > 0.1 as the dividing line, but I was unable to find anything backing that up. Without any significant usage of the term or a clear definition, I do not think it should be an article. James McBride ( talk) 05:29, 30 May 2010 (UTC) reply
I'm curious how Hot europa turns out. (Yikes.) I did try to improve puffy planet back in March by calling it what it is. -- Kheider ( talk) 04:17, 5 June 2010 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. No arguments for deletion aside from the nominator and 1 "incubate" suggestion. The issue of merging can be discussed on the article's talk page. ( non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman ( talk) 02:31, 6 June 2010 (UTC) reply
This seems to be a borderline neologism. A google search of "eccentric jupiter" returns 42 hits, most of which are not used in the manner of "eccentric Jupiter" as a term, but rather "an eccentric Jupiter-like planet" or something similar. For this reason, an exact definition does not seem to exist. The article uses e > 0.1 as the dividing line, but I was unable to find anything backing that up. Without any significant usage of the term or a clear definition, I do not think it should be an article. James McBride ( talk) 05:29, 30 May 2010 (UTC) reply
I'm curious how Hot europa turns out. (Yikes.) I did try to improve puffy planet back in March by calling it what it is. -- Kheider ( talk) 04:17, 5 June 2010 (UTC) reply