User:Sam-2727/Statement on NGC objects

This is a very niche, yet surprisingly contested point which effects a large swath of articles. At WP:NASTRO, it is stated that there should be articles for objects of high historical importance (e.g. New General Catalogue). Now, the NGC might be of "high historical importance," but there are 7840 objects in the catalogue. I did an analysis of 25 random ones, and it appears as if the fraction of objects that are notable under the general notability guidelines (i.e. multiple independent reliable sources) is somewhere between 25 and 50 percent. In this discussion, some seem to think that the catalogue is of enough historical importance that even if objects (usually galaxies) don't meet the general guidelines, they should be kept. My personal opinion is that the phrase (e.g. New General Catalogue) should be removed, as the information in all of the articles that don't meet the general notability guidelines can reasonably be put in a list (e.g. List of NGC objects).