Talk:HAT-P-32b

RFV discussion: May–July 2014
A particular planet. It seems to me that this is a code/designation rather than a true name, or dictionary term. Anyhow it doesn't seem attestable from Google Books and Groups. Equinox ◑ 19:51, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Is there any reason why these types of astronomical object names should be listed as words in languages instead of translingual? — Ungoliant (falai) 03:41, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree with Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV. But attestation is still key per WT:CFI. Renard Migrant (talk) 13:25, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Cited. — Ungoliant (falai) 19:03, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Passed. — Ungoliant (falai) 17:37, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

RFD discussion: September 2016
This is the proper name of a planet somewhere in the universe. I am not convinced this is dictionary material, we certainly don't need all the asteroids and all the stars either. I mean, sure, we should have anything with a proper name, like the planets of the solar system and then a few like Alpha Centauri. But this? -- Pedrianaplant (talk) 20:56, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - I wouldn't call this a word, just a code or designation. Keith the Koala (talk) 21:16, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. I think we should treat these like chemical formulas: there may be one or two of these that enter the lexicon independent of the technical literature (and references to it), but there are supposed to be codes like this for literally all the stars in the sky, and any exoplanet discovered will have a subcode of one of those. This is encyclopedia material, at best. Chuck Entz (talk) 21:31, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Deleted. — SMUconlaw (talk) 05:47, 24 September 2016 (UTC)