Regarding Patrick Schmeer's suggestions in vsnet-obs 30882: Why would anyone suggest that Maciej's or my observations of IX Dra be deleted? We are both using a chart based on the Henden/ Sumner sequence for this star. As for deleting the observations of WY Tri, if it had been in outburst I believe I would have seen it in this field even though I was looking for it east of it's actual position. Indeed, if I thought my observations were of little or no value I would have already suggested they be excluded. I would be very interested to hear from vsnet as to what their policy is as far as DELETING! observations and exactly who would make this determination and why. If observations reported by observers are now to be evaluated, and their "authenticity" and value judged by other observers, I may have a few suggestions for deletions of my own! As for EV Aqr, yes, it does appear to be a SRa with an amplitude of 1.5 mags or so. Most of the observers I know who are observing this star are already aware of this. Most of us are using the Henden/Sumner sequence charts for this too. Here are Bruce's notes regarding the star. "The lack of any past outbursts of this supposed UGZ variable, taken together with recent observations by Gary Poyner and Lance Shaw of semi-regular variations of the star near the catalogued position of EV Aqr, implies that EV Aqr has been misidentified as a dwarf nova. The position given here for EV Aqr is of the star observed by Poyner and Shaw. This star is identical with GSC 0526 01562 and is the star identified by Tsesevich and Kazanasmas (1971) as EV Aqr. The field photometry used to derive this sequence, over six separate nights, also confirms that the star here identified as EV Aqr is indeed a red variable. However this star appears to get bluer as it fades, contrary to what one would general expect for a pulsating variable. The exact nature of this variable remains to be determined." Bruce Sumner Revised 22 July 1999 Regards, Mike Simonsen