From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. We have articles for eclipses almost up to 2200 (which is somewhat arbitrary, I suppose?) In any case, we should either delete all articles beyond a certain year or leave this one as it is (closing keep). Tone 18:45, 12 September 2020 (UTC) reply

Solar eclipse of September 4, 2100 (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This event may or not happen and 100 years is far WP:TOOSOON for an article. WP:CRYSTAL. It is likely enough that the future event is already in the chart found here List of solar eclipses in the 21st century. Lightburst ( talk) 15:04, 5 September 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Lightburst ( talk) 15:08, 5 September 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Astronomy-related deletion discussions. Lightburst ( talk) 15:08, 5 September 2020 (UTC) reply
Why though? ItsPugle (please ping on reply) 01:46, 9 September 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Comment I think that this discussion is being lost about whether or not this eclipse will happen, which it almost certainly will... but that doesn't mean we need an entire article about it. It's ridiculous, there's no notability to it (you can see this in the citations - there's literally no sources, beyond automatically generated crap, that cover it), and the article's content itself is too technical for the general audience. ItsPugle (please ping on reply) 01:46, 9 September 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Keep - notable future event. And definite. Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 23:01, 11 September 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. We have articles for eclipses almost up to 2200 (which is somewhat arbitrary, I suppose?) In any case, we should either delete all articles beyond a certain year or leave this one as it is (closing keep). Tone 18:45, 12 September 2020 (UTC) reply

Solar eclipse of September 4, 2100 (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This event may or not happen and 100 years is far WP:TOOSOON for an article. WP:CRYSTAL. It is likely enough that the future event is already in the chart found here List of solar eclipses in the 21st century. Lightburst ( talk) 15:04, 5 September 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Lightburst ( talk) 15:08, 5 September 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Astronomy-related deletion discussions. Lightburst ( talk) 15:08, 5 September 2020 (UTC) reply
Why though? ItsPugle (please ping on reply) 01:46, 9 September 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Comment I think that this discussion is being lost about whether or not this eclipse will happen, which it almost certainly will... but that doesn't mean we need an entire article about it. It's ridiculous, there's no notability to it (you can see this in the citations - there's literally no sources, beyond automatically generated crap, that cover it), and the article's content itself is too technical for the general audience. ItsPugle (please ping on reply) 01:46, 9 September 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Keep - notable future event. And definite. Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 23:01, 11 September 2020 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook