Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Religion

Shortcuts

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Religion. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Religion|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Religion. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Religion/archive

Purge page cache

watch

Religion

St. Mary's Cemetery (Washington, D.C.)

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

No indication of notability (or anything useful or informative) in article at all, and it seems as if little beyond routine coverage can be found[1][2]. A redirect to Saint Mary, Mother of God Catholic Church (Washington, D.C.), assuming that they belong together, may be a good alternative. Fram (talk) 15:06, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Religion and Washington, D.C.. Fram (talk) 15:06, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I'm baffled why this "article" was created with a single useless sentence and zero independent sources. Do it in draft if you need to, not as micro-stubs without sources. Reywas92^Talk 15:30, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Simply not notable.— Moriwen (talk) 15:48, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Apparently, this was begun as a work in progress. This is already listed as a Stub. Editor Another Believer has since added more sourced content that tells us why and when it was established. — Maile (talk) 03:30, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure what "listed as a stub" means, that doesn't make a page notable. None of the sources added are significant coverage. All cemeteries were established at some point, a source providing that date and little else is not a basis for notability. Reywas92^Talk 04:15, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for asking. I should have been more clear. I was only trying to make the point that the article creator was aware that this article, as is right now, is only a stub and needs work. It might have worked better for the editor to first create the basic article in their own user sub page. But it is what it is, and let's hope the editor can add enough to keep this from being deleted. — Maile (talk) 04:28, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But which of the sources are establishing notability? A source like [chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://planning.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/op/publication/attachments/Glenwood%20Cemetery%20Nomination.pdf this] may note when it was established, but it is a purely passing mention in a source about another cemetery and does not give any indication of notability for this cemetery. Fram (talk) 07:38, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep based on the Washington Post coverage added, which I think adds sufficient color in prose beyond just listing database records. --Habst (talk) 12:42, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The full text is "ST. MARY'S CATHOLIC CEMETERY -- 2121 Lincoln Rd. NE. 202/635-7444. No cemetery office. Gates are open daily from sunrise to sunset. Originally this was a cemetery for St. Mary Mother of God Parish, established in 1845 at 725 Fifth St. NW. This was a working-class cemetery first for German butchers, bakers and others, later for Italians who were stonecutters and laborers. The oldest gravestone is dated Nov. 16, 1862." That's 3 sentences in a long article about the Washington cemeteries. Fram (talk) 12:52, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Akrokre Festival

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

I can't find any mention of this festival. "Akrokre" appears to be an isiXhosa word meaning something like "suspect" or "suspicious"; the word appears in this travelogue, but in a context unrelated to any festival. I was unable to find any other mentions of the word, let alone the festival. Suriname0 (talk) 18:21, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The festival actually exists, I just watched a Facebook video on it. However, the festival lack the sources that can make it notable on the Wikipedia, Ibjaja055 (talk) 21:57, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Religion, Africa, and Ghana. Suriname0 (talk) 18:21, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:25, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Abdullah Hashem

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

BLP of the founder of a religious sect. The sect itself appears to be notable but it does not seem that the leader himself is. I think a redirect to Ahmadi Religion of Peace and Light would probably be best. Mccapra (talk) 22:12, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Religion. Mccapra (talk) 22:12, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Egypt, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:17, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Google searches easily turn up hundreds of high-profile mentions. There are articles from Amnesty International, the UN, and various governments, and dozens of major newspapers that all mention him. Easily meets WP:BIO and WP:SIGCOV criteria. For sects with that many media mentions, their founders and leaders would usually also be notable enough. There is also plenty of information about Hashem that would fit well into a standalone article. DjembeDrums (talk) 17:46, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ok which three of these do you think provide the best in-depth coverage? Mccapra (talk) 21:49, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Article only cited one source almost which shows they still need to meet WP:GNG to stand alone Tesleemah (talk) 20:10, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: If merge, merge where?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 22:19, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 02:35, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Religion Proposed deletions

Religion Templates

Atheism

Proposed deletions (WP:PROD)

Buddhism

Templates

Miscellaneous

Christianity

Better Days (Robbie Seay Band album)

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

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

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

Articles about albums, not properly referenced as having any strong claim to passing WP:NALBUMS. As usual, Wikipedia's approach to albums used to extend an automatic presumption of notability to any album that was recorded by a notable artist regardless of sourcing or the lack thereof, in the name of completionist directoryism -- but that's long since been deprecated, and an album now has to have a meaningful notability claim (chart success, notable music awards, a significant volume of coverage and analysis about it, etc.) and WP:GNG-worthy sourcing to support it.
But none of these three albums are making any notability claim above and beyond "this is an album that exists", two of the three are completely unreferenced, and the one that does have references doesn't have good ones: it's citing one review in an unreliable source, and one "Billboard chart history" that lists no actual chart positions and is present only to footnote a release date that it doesn't actually support rather than any charting claims.
As always, I'm willing to withdraw this if somebody with much more expertise in Christian music than I've got can find the right kind of sourcing to salvage them, but simply existing isn't "inherently" notable enough to exempt an album from having to pass GNG. Bearcat (talk) 14:53, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 14:53, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and Christianity. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:09, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lilia Tarawa

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

WP:BLP1E only notable in regards to Gloriavale. Most of the stuff not in regards to Gloriavale are from promotional pieces and Tarawa herself. Traumnovelle (talk) 20:36, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Most of the sources are neither reliable nor independent. They are full of primary sources written by the subject or from unreliable blogs. Ibjaja055 (talk) 21:37, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Christianity, and New Zealand. Traumnovelle (talk) 20:36, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Women. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:13, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There's enough here to show GNG. She's written a book that Martin van Beynen has called "bestselling". It created a lot of publicity, for example, John Campbell interviewed her for 10 min on Radio New Zealand. She gets keynote speaking slots and, whilst that's nothing unusual, it is unusual when Stuff reports on that. She's been invited to give a talk at TEDxChristchurch and it takes quite something to get invited to TEDx. The pieces by Kurt Bayer (NZHerald; based in Christchurch), Eleanor Black (Stuff), and Now to Love (which belongs to Are Media) go into plenty enough depth to fulfil the criteria of three independent reliable sources. And all those sources are in the article already. All up, that's an easy keep. Schwede 66 04:23, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Waikato Times piece is a promotional piece for the business awards. The Now to Love piece is just her interview with Women's Daily. The other Stuff piece is also a promotional piece.

This is the same for most of the refs, they're either promo pieces or interviews about Gloriavale. Traumnovelle (talk) 06:20, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas Niven

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

Being the Moderator of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland in 1906 appears to be his only claim to notability. Independent reliable sources are wholly lacking. Clarityfiend (talk) 11:36, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Christianity, and Scotland. Shellwood (talk) 11:47, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – I've added multiple newspaper sources. Beyond being Moderator, he authored a volume of historical writing and was given an honorary degree "in recognition of his eminence as a preacher and of his leterary work". I think he meets WP:GNG. Drchriswilliams (talk) 09:35, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as the article has been improved with the addition of content referenced to a number of articles in a reliable newspaper The Glasgow Herald, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 20:00, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:HEY. The Moderator is equivalent to a bishop in the Anglican or Roman Catholic Churches or chief rabbi. The Church of Scotland was the ”established” religion of Scotland when he was moderator. Bearian (talk) 03:15, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Moderators are clearly notable. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:24, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Herbert Daughtry

AfDs for this article:

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

Notability is WP:NOTINHERITED from his daughter or his protege. Reliable sources appear to only have passing mentions of him. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:23, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Christianity, and New York. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:23, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment @Muboshgu: A search in the NY Times archive: [3] shows he has gotten press for decades as an important community activist in New York City. Thriley (talk) 19:37, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
NY Times archive to me appears to be passing mentions. I lack a subscription though so I can't see some of them. I don't know what to make of this for notability. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:40, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Courtesy link for those with WP:Library ProQuest access. --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 20:34, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is a different Herbert Daughtry. The Herbert Daughtry of this afd was 47 in 1978: [4] Thriley (talk) 21:13, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration. Thriley (talk) 21:22, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Daughtry has received widespread press coverage over six decades. Meets GNG. Thriley (talk) 18:15, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nosral Recordings

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

NCORP fail Potential merge target Rottweiler Records too appears to be NCORP fail. Graywalls (talk) 23:13, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Companies, and Wisconsin. Graywalls (talk) 23:13, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:23, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete same issues as with Rottweiler Records, the sources all check out, I’ll accept the source as a reliable one, but there isn’t enough extended coverage of the company itself to pass NCORP
Absurdum4242 (talk) 17:11, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. At worst, a merge to Rottweiler, which ought to be kept too, so ultimately this is a moot conversation, but it looks like this sublabel has enough of a roster and press coverage to pass muster on its own. I'm agnostic as to whether these label articles continue on as one or two separate articles, so long as the content is preserved. Chubbles (talk) 06:07, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Which three sources do you believe would satisfy NCORP for this article @Chubbles: ? Graywalls (talk) 22:14, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 02:37, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rottweiler Records

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

NCORP fail Graywalls (talk) 23:15, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Companies, and Indiana. Graywalls (talk) 23:15, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Christianity and Texas. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:23, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Fairly clearly meets the sense of an important label as given in the WP:MUSIC guideline, and the article has citations indicating the label gets regular coverage in music press. Chubbles (talk) 06:04, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete I’d love to agree with you, because they seem really interesting, but… NCORP not NMUSIC is the right standard to judge them on, and everything I can see in the article is either passing coverage, or basic business process (the sale to new owners) coverage… but nothing giving any sort of extended coverage of the company itself. It’s all “band x signs to Rottweiler Records” and then a ton about band x, but nothing about the company. So weirdly they would count for the band’s notability, but not the company’s. Absurdum4242 (talk) 17:07, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 00:14, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Helaman Jeffs

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

No indication of standalone notability. Hardly any coverage of the subject; notability is not inherited. (NPP action) C F A 💬 20:19, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Christianity. C F A 💬 20:21, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arizona-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:54, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Latter Day Saints-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:49, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Multiple references (already found on the article) are stating that he is claiming to be the current head of the FLDS church, I will hunt down some more sources. Thief-River-Faller (talk) 12:54, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That doesn't really matter. There needs be significant coverage in independent, reliable sources in order to meet WP:NBASIC. C F A 💬 14:40, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:01, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

St. Vincent's Home for the Aged

AfDs for this article:

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

Fails NORG. The article contains WP:OR and appears promotional. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 04:43, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Christianity, and Pakistan. Shellwood (talk) 07:44, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep: Given that there are some sources with definite SIGCOV in English plus a handful like this that provide partial coverage, I'm inclined towards keep. I'm not familiar with the local languages, but I'd hazard to guess that further RS SIGCOV exists. ~ Pbritti (talk) 04:09, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Pbritti, SIGCOV doesn't exist in the local language, unfortunately. Courtesy ping @Wikibear47: to ask if they found coverage in local languages? — Saqib (talk I contribs) 08:07, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Not really. Its a pretty obscure place with not much coverage. Wikibear47 (talk) 06:22, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Can't find independent reliable coverage Wikibear47 (talk) 06:24, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 07:45, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:37, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

L'Opus Dei: enquête sur le "monstre"

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

The only usable source here is La Libre, which is not sigcov and is not enough. Found 1 other journal source that looks good (though I question its independence). Redirect to author Patrice de Plunkett? PARAKANYAA (talk) 04:39, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature and Christianity. PARAKANYAA (talk) 04:39, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There seem to be a number of reviews and coverage in French, until we can say otherwise I think we can assume that there is enough coverage outside the english language. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 16:42, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Horse Eye's Back No reliable, significant ones to my awareness. None found in a search of French media sources either. Every French source used here is a blog, or passing mention. Or has no independence from the Opus Dei, which obviously has a COI here. PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:31, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For context, the sources used inline are linking to the ones in the further reading. These sources are four interviews with blogs, all affiliated with Da Vinci Code conspiracies or the Opus Dei, and the brief La Libre mention. PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:42, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: There doesn't seem to be any coverage in French... I tried the title with "critique" or "revue critique"... you can get a thousand places to buy it, see where it's held in libraries... This was all I could find that even mentions it [5]... The subject of Ops Dei is mentioned here, but not specifically about the book [6]. Oaktree b (talk) 23:51, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Oaktree b For future reference the word usually used for (well, some, typically academic reviews) book reviews in French is compte rendu. There is one review I found while searching that phrase but I think it's from an Opus Dei affiliated publication so questionable independence. Even if its not, it's only one. PARAKANYAA (talk) 00:07, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the correction... I'm not using my French as much as I should, it gets jumbled with the English in my head. Oaktree b (talk) 00:12, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Recommended reading here [7], but there isn't much coverage of the book. Oaktree b (talk) 00:16, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thoughts on a redirect? PARAKANYAA (talk) 00:21, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose we could redirect to the author, his name comes up enough in searches. Oaktree b (talk) 16:46, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:21, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 16:32, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Christianity Proposed deletions (WP:PROD)

Categories for discussion

Christian religious leaders: further follow-up required, see Category talk:Religious leaders#Clergy categories

Miscellaneous

Hinduism

Swamini Brahmaprajnananda Saraswati

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

The subject of this BLP does not meet WP:NBIO, WP:NAUTHOR, nor the WP:GNG. The article was drafted by someone who has a suspect COI but the author has been banned for sockpuppetry, notably for removing maintenance tags. An IP user on my talk page has acknowledged that there isn't even very much published information on the subject. Combined with my BEFORE, I'm not seeing anything that meets our notability requirements for this article that appears to be masquerading as an advertisement. Bobby Cohn (talk) 23:39, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Hinduism. Bobby Cohn (talk) 23:39, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Women, Psychology, and Maharashtra. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:10, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hindu University of America

AfDs for this article:

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

This institution is unaccredited, and SCHOOLOUTCOMES#2 cannot apply. Thus, it needs to pass the stringent WP:NORG, which it does not — there is no significant coverage of the subject in multiple reliable secondary sources independent of the subject. TrangaBellam (talk) 21:05, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Hinduism, India, United States of America, and Florida. TrangaBellam (talk) 21:07, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:15, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per nomination. Doesn't meet notability, fails WP:SIGCOV. Ratekreel (talk) 23:21, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Page does not satisfy the notability guidelines for organization. Poor sources on the page with no significant coverage. Fails WP:NSCHOOL. RangersRus (talk) 11:40, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I've expanded the article by adding several references, including to a fairly in-depth profile in the Orlando Sentinel, and to a book by a sociologist who describes the emergence of the university and calls it a "milestone". Notability is arguably established, and even if it isn't, more references with nontrivial material can be found. One of the primary purposes of notability guidelines is to ensure that there is sufficient material to create an informative article, and there is clearly enough published material on this university (even though one might wish for more so that an even meatier article would be possible). For further expansion, there just needs to be effort put in to tap that material and integrate it into the article. --Presearch (talk) 23:19, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Have you noted that this "fairly in-depth profile" has no author? So, no — an advertorial (churnalism) in a local newspaper does NOT add toward notability.

Notability is arguably established, and even if it isn't, more references with nontrivial material can be found This article is at AfD because I (and others) believe that notability is not established and I am happy to see you accept that. Regrettably, we cannot speculate about sourcing esp. that we are discussing an organization in USA and not, say, Sudan! Further, WP:NEXIST cautions, However, once an article's notability has been challenged, merely asserting that unspecified sources exist is seldom persuasive, especially if time passes and actual proof does not surface.

It's not my case that no sources exist — 1 and 2 from among the very few hits in Newspapers.com — but that they are trivial and/or they are routine run-of-the-mill coverage. TrangaBellam (talk) 07:23, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've added several more sources, all with named authors, and arguably all from reliable sources. All of these provide "more than a trivial mention," and in some cases the university was indeed "the main topic of the source material", so each of these arguably contributes "significant coverage" for meeting general notability (WP:GNG)

Regarding the Orlando Sentinel article, that may now be moot, but it's worth noting that the newspaper is reputable, and the userfied (non-Wikipedia) essay on "churnalism" acknowledges that "If a reliable source decides to fact check a press release and write a story about it, it then meets the definition of coming from a reliable source" - that raises the question of whether an absence of named author is enough grounds to treat this article as unreliable when it's from an otherwise reputable source (have you found any duplicate versions of the same material on numerous sites?). (By the way, friend, I suspect you know that a statement that something "is arguably established" is different than stating that it is "not established") --Presearch (talk) 01:14, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"News India Times" is not even a RS in all probabilities. And, a couple of articles in India Abroad — a now-defunct publication aimed exclusively at the Indian diaspora with a peak circulation of ~ thirty thousand — do not make the entity wiki-notable; if anything, such meager coverage in such a niche publication only goes to demonstrate the non-notability.

Further, NCORP has a higher standard for sources to contribute toward notability. This is due to the levels of (undisclosed; see WP:TOI) paid-coverage frequently engaged in by business entities. So, we look for sources that do not mechanically reproduce what the organization says and show some critical engagement. TrangaBellam (talk) 05:42, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Leaning keep. I get 290 hits on Newspapers.com, including the fairly substantial Mark I. Pinsky, "School of Thought: Hindu University begins journey in teaching... with a degree of karma", The Hilton Head Island Packet (July 3, 2004), p. 1-C, 3-C, and Amy Limbert, "Kuldip Gupta, 66, helped found, lead Hindu University of America", The Orlando Sentinel (February 9, 2007), p. B6. Also, "Hinduism: Studying the ancients", The Atlanta Constitution (September 28, 1996), p. G4; "Beavercreek: Online Hindu classes", Dayton Daily News (January 9, 2021), p. B3. BD2412 T 01:46, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 11:49, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shri Krishna (1993 TV series)

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

Sources on the page are unreliable and fall under WP:NEWSORGINDIA. A WP:BEFORE found nothing reliable, just more of the same. CNMall41 (talk) 07:38, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India. CNMall41 (talk) 07:38, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List_of_programs_broadcast_by_DD_National#Drama_series. I was thinking of redirect to the production company Sagar Films but this has no source on the page. RangersRus (talk) 11:49, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Given the existing coverage (such as https://www.republicworld.com/entertainment/television/after-ramayan-twitterati-welcome-ramanand-sagars-shri-krishna#google_vignette, https://theprint.in/india/after-ramayan-and-mahabharat-now-shri-krishna-to-return-on-dd/407561/ etc etc); or redirect (/as a historically important series for/) to the network. Very opposed to deletion. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:52, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Hinduism. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:54, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: As Mushy Yank said above, remove some sources, and find more reliable sources, but very opposed to deletion Auspiciouswastaken (talk) 20:50, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Again, after some research, I'm just finding out that 160 episodes were filmed with the actor "Swapnil Joshi" but then they were deleted and refilmed from episode 73, Tilak has also wiped some articles too just because they contained some footage. and while deleted by some user, It also did air on ZEE TV, it has many indecisive things, for exmaple some sources say it aired from '93 to '96 while others say it's aired from '93 to '96 but later shifted to DD1, some other say that it was aired in '99 on ZEE TV for the first time and some that it aired on DD2-Metro and shifted to ZEETV and/or DD, It's very hard to find truthful sources, as all talk about the same thing but say it differently. for say the example mentioned above. Auspiciouswastaken (talk) 20:59, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rather keep it and do more research on it. Auspiciouswastaken (talk) 21:00, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Two mentions that verify it exists is hardly enough to establish notability. If that were the case, pretty much every television show would be notable. --CNMall41 (talk) 22:32, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely true, but it takes some time to find some reliable sources. Auspiciouswastaken (talk) 05:46, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All articles talk about the same thing, just their matter is different, even with some or for say a lot of digging can be done but it results to the repetitive articles. Though for me deletion is not okay. Auspiciouswastaken (talk) 05:57, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Page has been up since 2009, and by now we all realize after quite some digging that no reliable sources with indepth significant coverage is to be found. Redirect is better than to keep. Right? RangersRus (talk) 12:46, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We could've redirected, if for say there was any good mention of it anywhere, but any mentions of it are exotic across wikipedia Auspiciouswastaken (talk) 15:57, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.republicworld.com/entertainment/television/krishna-cast-here-is-a-list-of-actors-and-the-characters-they-play

https://www.indiatoday.in/television/soaps/story/after-ramayan-ramanand-sagar-s-shri-krishna-to-return-on-doordarshan-1670255-2020-04-23

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/tv/news/hindi/after-ramayans-end-viewers-welcome-ramanand-sagars-shri-krishna/articleshow/75547221.cms

https://mumbaimirror.indiatimes.com/coronavirus/news/after-ramayan-shri-krishna-returns-to-dd/articleshow/75359729.cms

https://www.indiatvnews.com/photos/entertainment-swapnil-joshi-shri-krishna-ramayan-comedy-circus-mahasangram-611899

https://www.filmibeat.com/television/news/2020/after-ramayan-and-mahabharat-doordarshan-to-bring-back-ramanand-sagars-shri-krishna-298001.html

https://hindi.news18.com/news/entertainment/tv-ramayan-will-end-today-on-doordarshan-shri-krishna-will-start-from-ss-3073219.html

https://www.aajtak.in/entertainment/television/story/krishna-janmashtami-2022-date-18-or-19-august-know-where-is-ramanand-sagar-shri-krishna-show-cast-tmovf-1519979-2022-08-18

https://navbharattimes.indiatimes.com/tv/news/when-and-how-to-watch-shree-krishna-on-doordarshan/articleshow/75501800.cms

https://www.bhaskarhindi.com/city/mumbai/union-minister-piyush-goyal-congratulated-mahant-swami-maharaj-on-his-91st-birthday-1066201?infinitescroll=1

https://www.thelivemirror.com/doordarshan-brings-back-shri-krishna/

https://www.latestly.com/entertainment/tv/how-marathi-actor-swwapnil-joshi-became-the-common-link-between-dd-shows-uttar-ramayan-and-sri-krishna-1724038.html

https://www.indiatvnews.com/entertainment/tv/enjoyed-watching-ramayan-now-ramanand-sagar-s-shri-krishna-set-to-return-on-doordarshan-611513

https://navbharattimes.indiatimes.com/photomazza/tv-photogalleries/janmashtami-2023-top-show-shri-krishna-1993-cast-where-is-yashoda-maiya-damini-kanwal-shetty-now/photoshow/msid-103423057,picid-103423197.cms

https://www.financialexpress.com/life/entertainment-sri-krishna-telecast-time-on-dd-national-doordarshan-sri-krishna-broadcast-timing-daily-1946373/

https://amarujala.com/photo-gallery/entertainment/television/shri-krishna-actor-krishna-aka-sarvadaman-d-banerjee-now-where-is-he

https://www.jansatta.com/photos/entertainment-gallery/shri-krishna-actor-mahendra-muralidhar-dhule-played-bhima-ramanand-sagar-serial-sri-krishna-3-times-played-kumbhakaran-still-looks-like-young-boy/1439996/3/

https://www.hindustantimes.com/tv/shri-krishna-the-show-that-turned-swapnil-joshi-into-god/story-pRZnHUDgao6rAmuqEwsInL.html

https://www.naidunia.com/entertainment/bollywood-ramanand-sagar-shri-krishna-will-be-retelecast-on-dd-national-form-3-may-2020-know-its-timings-5530789

https://zeenews.india.com/hindi/entertainment/photo-gallery-krishna-janmashtami-2022-know-how-much-shri-krishna-cast-serial-1993-cast-change-in-29-years/1306669

https://hindi.scoopwhoop.com/entertainment/where-is-1993-shri-krishna-show-sudama-actor-mukul-nag/

https://www.jansatta.com/photos/entertainment-gallery/shri-krishna-radha-reshma-modi-played-in-many-bollywood-movie-after-27-years-he-looks-changed-photos-covid-19/1404748/

These are some sources that I found. I think they're reliable Auspiciouswastaken (talk) 16:18, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

wait https://www.bhaskarhindi.com/city/mumbai/union-minister-piyush-goyal-congratulated-mahant-swami-maharaj-on-his-91st-birthday-1066201?infinitescroll=1. is a wromg source help Auspiciouswastaken (talk) 20:39, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not worth entertaining a discussion when the first reference you supplied falls squarely under WP:NEWSORGINDIA. Won't waste time looking at the rest as it seems to be a misunderstanding of what constitutes a reliable source. A redirect is acceptable as we can verify it exists, but nothing that shows it is notable. --CNMall41 (talk) 23:32, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, so now that you mention that it falls Wikipedia:NEWSORGINDIA, I think, you're actually right. I think deletion would be ok, as there's no adequate source to find. (Ignore this here I was trying not to start an argument but oh well.) Auspiciouswastaken (talk) 07:51, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But again, I think this show deserves a page. Auspiciouswastaken (talk) 07:53, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Are you changing your vote to delete?--CNMall41 (talk) 20:01, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

no. I am not. This show is of significance and deserves a page, no arguing Auspiciouswastaken (talk) 22:10, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"I think, you're actually right. I think deletion would be ok, as there's no adequate source to find" - This is written as if you are. At least, it does agree there is no adequate sourcing so without it I am wondering your policy-based reasoning for keeping it. --CNMall41 (talk) 00:57, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is what I was thinking, until I kept finding stuff, Auspiciouswastaken (talk) 08:34, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also curious about this edit as you added content that is no where in the source. --CNMall41 (talk) 23:34, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The cast or the above para? Auspiciouswastaken (talk) 07:48, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you're talking about cast, I just corrected some errors, and if you're talking about the above para, It's common knowledge to know DD didn't stream it in '97 and hence it was handed to ZEE TV, and Sony & Star did stream it following 2001. Auspiciouswastaken (talk) 07:56, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Common knowledge? I certainly didn't know about it. In Wikipedia we are allowed to state the obvious (e.g., the sky is blue), but what you added would be WP:OR at best. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:00, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find any adequate source as all would "apparently fall under Wikipedia:NEWSORGINDIA", but here's a statement from the production team- https://production.sagarworld.com/shri-krishna Auspiciouswastaken (talk) 21:01, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Production company is considered primary and not secondary independent reliable source. RangersRus (talk) 23:19, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you need further source, here's an image of it airing on Zee TV, (footage is now deleted and replaced with SD Banerjee) Auspiciouswastaken (talk) 21:06, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This article has significantly changed since its AfD nomination. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:28, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Analysis of sources.
- Source 1 and 2 are announcement of airing the show.
- Source 3 has passing mention with sale of VCD and the price being sold for.
- Source 4 is primary source sagarworld founded by the son and grandson of Ramanand Sagar, Director and Producer of the show.
- Source 5 is interview wirh Moti Sagar, the youngest son of Director and Producer Ramanand Sagar of the show.
- Source 6 is intervew with Govind Khatri, an actor from the show about what role was originally offered to him and about his life after the series.
- Source 7,8,9,10,11,12 are all about Sarvadaman D. Banerjee (main lead of the show) and interview with him, on his life after the series.

All sources are poor with some WP:NEWSORGINDIA and no reliable source independent of the makers and actors of the show with indepth significant coverage to pass notability. RangersRus (talk) 23:37, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure your assessment is completely correct. Taking just one example, source 5 offers very significant coverage beside an interview, in a bylined article in a very reliable newspaper. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 07:38, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sourve 5 says "Krishna made Swapnil Joshi a star overnight; co-director Moti Sagar talks about the TV show." This source is not independent of the claim by the makers themselves. Source needs to be completely secondary independent. RangersRus (talk) 15:20, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do I have to copy and paste the whole article here? The major part is attributed to the journalist. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 15:57, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot make it any more clearer than what the journalist himself said on the top of his article about the maker talking about the show and anything that journalist wrote in that article is the outcome of the interview. It is not an indepedent source at all. I am leaving at that. RangersRus (talk) 16:10, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following parts can be attributed Kavita Awaasthi, journalist for The Hindustan Times, based on her interview with Sagar; the media outlet being considered generally reliable, they can be used to verify a number of facts that contribute to the notability of the program, such as, at least:

After making the successful TV show Ramayan, producer Ramanand Sagar wanted to tap into another epic show — the Bhagavat Puran. Produced by Ramanand, Subhash Sagar and Prem Sagar, and directed by Ramanand, Anand Sagar and Moti Sagar, Shri Krishna was one of the biggest grossers for Doordarshan during the seven years it was on air. The national broadcaster had a limit on the number of episodes it could air in the ’80s, but the ’90s brought about a change in these rules. A producer could now make a show for a longer duration.

Music composer Ravindra Jain composed the music for this serial. The title song, ‘Shree Krishna Govind Hare Murari’, became popular in India and abroad. The show ran for more than seven years, and had over 200 episodes. The show covered Krishna’s life, from his birth to the time of his grandchildren.

The show was shot in Gujarat’s Umbergaon and Vadodara, where they put up huge sets.

Swapnil had a huge fan following because of the show. People thought he was Krishna.

This, in my opinion, in a 2016 article about a 1993 program, can be given a certain credit and at least contributes to the apparent notability of the show (that had, as I am sure you have noticed, 221 episodes and originally aired during 6 years.....) and I think that the material, if the page was redirected, would be lost, which would be detrimental to the encyclopaedia. (And that's just one source). Thank you. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 16:41, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

^{omg finally for goodness' sake someone mentions this, I'm not trying to be rude but why can't someone just read the sources and watch the show for 2 whole minutes to get some fruit out of it. GOD! (replied to mushy yank)} Auspiciouswastaken (talk) 18:43, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: There are reliable sources present, opposed to deletion. Imsaneikigai (talk) 14:36, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Demonstrate so called reliable sources present that has not already been analysed above. RangersRus (talk) 15:24, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List_of_programs_broadcast_by_DD_National#Drama_series: where it will only need to be verifiable, which it is, rather than to have reliable sources proving notability, which it lacks. Owen× ☎ 17:36, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting for additional and more thorough source analysis.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 01:10, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:07, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Templates

Miscellaneous

Hinduism Proposed deletions (WP:PROD)

Islam

ÇOMÜ Faculty of Theology

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/ÇOMÜ Faculty of Theology

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

We already have page for the university, I don't think this faculty is notable on its own we don't need this page. Moreover the article is unsourced. Pedian4169 (talk) 20:14, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education and Turkey. Shellwood (talk) 20:31, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - this has existed since 2012 with no sources whatsoever. — Maile (talk) 20:36, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and Islam. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:07, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Majlis Al-Noor

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

Fails WP:SIGCOV. References are event listings. scope_creep^Talk 16:12, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Islam and Kerala. Shellwood (talk) 16:37, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: As per nom. Thilsebatti (talk) 06:26, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Previously at a deletion discussion (WP:RFD) so Soft Deletion is not an option.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:33, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: There is a reliable source, pass WP:GNG (With 10,70000+ daily Circulation Mathrubhumi news reports : [8] ) and (With 350,000+ daily Circulation - Madhyamam report: [9], (Suprabhaatham report: [10]) other report [11],[12] , It is an event and Recitation#Islam(Sunni Islam) audience Like this Qawwali ~~ --Spworld2 (talk) 1:47,2 October 2024 (UTC)

Others

See Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2019 July 11#Category:New Christians (conversos), proposed renaming of Category:New Christians (conversos) to either: ALT1 Category:New Christians (conversos) to Category:New Christians (moriscos and conversos) or ALT2 Category:New Christians (conversos) to Category:New Christians (Iberia)

Judaism topics

Elijah Kahlenberg

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

BLP that reads like an organisation article. Lots of interview and profiles, passing mentions. Fails WP:BIO, WP:SIGCOV. scope_creep^Talk 19:13, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Scope creep, I am the one who created the article. I have no financial relationship with the subject 66.112.246.20 (talk) 19:25, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am relatively new to wiki-editting, but happy to make any proper edits to avoid deletion. Just message me with some guided assistance and I will be happy to make changes. StepToMyLeft123 (talk) 19:29, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Texas. Shellwood (talk) 20:00, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Judaism. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:19, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and rename to Atidna (following AfD discussion). The article does read a bit WP:PROMO on the organization and could be trimmed, and coverage on Kahlenberg is in the context of coverage about Atidna. There's enough WP:SIGCOV to meet WP:GNG nonetheless. Longhornsg (talk) 02:32, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Longhornsg: How is the organisation notable. It was created in 2002 and there is virtually no coverage on it, outside a few interviews with Kahlenberg. scope_creep^Talk 11:58, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Scope creep It was created in 2022 actually and has over 30 interviews from different sources including from Al Jazeera, CNN, NPR, ABC News, Axios, etc listed. Quick search shows there are even more not even mentioned on the page. This meets notable standards. I say keep and rename, although the article is lengthy. It is probably better to split into two articles, one about Kahlenberg and one about Atidna. TheHalalanator (talk) 20:21, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I meant 2022. I would have to send the Atidna article to Afd. Its not notable as an organisation and would fail WP:NCORP. I see this is your first edit on Wikipedia. How did you managed to find this Afd I wonder. scope_creep^Talk 09:44, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:23, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sikhism

Miscellaneous

Religion

Religion Proposed deletions

Religion Templates

Atheism

Proposed deletions (WP:PROD)

Buddhism

Categories

Templates

Miscellaneous

Christianity

Christianity Proposed deletions (WP:PROD)

Categories for discussion

Miscellaneous

Hinduism

Categories

Templates

Miscellaneous

Hinduism Proposed deletions (WP:PROD)

Islam

Others

Judaism topics

Sikhism

Miscellaneous

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.