Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Acharya S (2nd nomination): Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Ism schism (talk | contribs) →Acharya S: comment on lack of reliable sources for 3 years |
Ism schism (talk | contribs) →Acharya S: reply on 3 year history of no reliable sources |
||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
:*'''Comment''' Many people write books. For notability, more is required than having a book or two. There must be reliable sources that show the subject of the article to be notable. Thanks. [[User:Ism schism|Ism schism]] ([[User talk:Ism schism|talk]]) 04:56, 27 June 2008 (UTC) |
:*'''Comment''' Many people write books. For notability, more is required than having a book or two. There must be reliable sources that show the subject of the article to be notable. Thanks. [[User:Ism schism|Ism schism]] ([[User talk:Ism schism|talk]]) 04:56, 27 June 2008 (UTC) |
||
::*'''Comment''' Please see [[WP:N#Articles_not_satisfying_the_notability_guidelines]]: ''"If it is likely that independent sources could be found for a topic, deletion due to lack of notability is inappropriate unless active effort has been made to find these sources. For articles of unclear notability, deletion should be a last resort."'' So this might be a bit premature. Also, I note that you have littered the article with inappropriate fact tags. [[User:^^James^^|^^James^^]] ([[User talk:^^James^^|talk]]) 05:27, 27 June 2008 (UTC) |
::*'''Comment''' Please see [[WP:N#Articles_not_satisfying_the_notability_guidelines]]: ''"If it is likely that independent sources could be found for a topic, deletion due to lack of notability is inappropriate unless active effort has been made to find these sources. For articles of unclear notability, deletion should be a last resort."'' So this might be a bit premature. Also, I note that you have littered the article with inappropriate fact tags. [[User:^^James^^|^^James^^]] ([[User talk:^^James^^|talk]]) 05:27, 27 June 2008 (UTC) |
||
::*'''Reply''' Please see '''Three year history of no reliable sources.''' Also, you have been editing this article for three years and have added no reliable sources. So, as you stated above, "If it is likely that independent sources could be found for a topic..." Well, you have had three years. Do you have anything else to add? Thanks. [[User:Ism schism|Ism schism]] ([[User talk:Ism schism|talk]]) 05:30, 27 June 2008 (UTC) |
:::*'''Reply''' Please see '''Three year history of no reliable sources.''' Also, you have been editing this article for three years and have added no reliable sources. So, as you stated above, "If it is likely that independent sources could be found for a topic..." Well, you have had three years. Do you have anything else to add? Thanks. [[User:Ism schism|Ism schism]] ([[User talk:Ism schism|talk]]) 05:30, 27 June 2008 (UTC) |
||
*'''Comment''' This article has been edited for over 3 years by [[User:^^James^^|^^James^^]] and other editors concerned with the article. In this time, no reliable sources have been added to the article. Thanks. [[User:Ism schism|Ism schism]] ([[User talk:Ism schism|talk]]) 05:53, 27 June 2008 (UTC) |
*'''Comment''' This article has been edited for over 3 years by [[User:^^James^^|^^James^^]] and other editors concerned with the article. In this time, no reliable sources have been added to the article. Thanks. [[User:Ism schism|Ism schism]] ([[User talk:Ism schism|talk]]) 05:53, 27 June 2008 (UTC) |
||
Revision as of 06:34, 27 June 2008
AfDs for this article:
- Acharya S (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Non notable with no reliable sources. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 14:13, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. —Ism schism (talk) 14:15, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
- Delete. Not notable. No reliable independent data concerning her life. Majority of article is about her books and theories. Jchurchward (talk) 22:38, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
- Strong delete This article has been, for over 3 years, on wikipedia with no reliable sources. The subject is non notable. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 02:10, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Keep The author is notable in her field. This is a basic article - who she is and what she does. As it should be. Aren't her books reliable enough sources when describing what she writes about?? ^^James^^ (talk) 04:47, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Comment Many people write books. For notability, more is required than having a book or two. There must be reliable sources that show the subject of the article to be notable. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 04:56, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Comment Please see WP:N#Articles_not_satisfying_the_notability_guidelines: "If it is likely that independent sources could be found for a topic, deletion due to lack of notability is inappropriate unless active effort has been made to find these sources. For articles of unclear notability, deletion should be a last resort." So this might be a bit premature. Also, I note that you have littered the article with inappropriate fact tags. ^^James^^ (talk) 05:27, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Reply Please see Three year history of no reliable sources. Also, you have been editing this article for three years and have added no reliable sources. So, as you stated above, "If it is likely that independent sources could be found for a topic..." Well, you have had three years. Do you have anything else to add? Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 05:30, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Comment This article has been edited for over 3 years by ^^James^^ and other editors concerned with the article. In this time, no reliable sources have been added to the article. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 05:53, 27 June 2008 (UTC)