Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Heliocentric astrology

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The result was Nomination Withdrawn. Nomination Withdrawn per WP:HEYMANN update to the article. (non-admin closure) scope_creep^Talk 16:03, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Heliocentric astrology

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Page was redirected then reverted. References are non-existant. Fails WP:SIGCOV and something else. No significant coverage. scope_creep^Talk 12:35, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, neither the editor who made the redirect nor the nominator took the time to find that there is indeed significant coverage, starting in 1899. There are also modern works and journal articles on both the history of the topic and the topic in general. A selection of half-a-dozen sources have been added for future use bringing the article up to standards. Skyerise (talk) 12:45, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nomination withdrawn Article has been extensively updated with excellent sourcing that confirms to the WP:HEYMANN standard. Feels ok. scope_creep^Talk 15:55, 15 December 2022 (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.