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

Ibrahim Abdurrahman Farajajé

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

The only source that appears at all credible is the article "Whatever Way Love's Camel Takes: Remembering Baba Ibrahim Farajajé," which reads as more of a posthumous tribute than anything establishing notability, almost like an obituary (granted it was published a few years after his death, but the sentiment seems similar). All the other sources are either closely affiliated with the subject or do not appear to be generally reputable. An online search seems to return mostly the same things already being used as sources here, with an additional article on Google scholar that again appears to be a simple tribute. This individual certainly led an interesting life, but I see no evidence that they managed to attain notability. Anonymous 00:39, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Anonymous 00:39, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Bloated bio of a scholar who appears to have made almost no impact. Xxanthippe (talk) 02:22, 19 November 2024 (UTC).[reply]
weak delete: More than a few journals remembered this individual after their passing, the one given in the article and this one [1]. With a book tribute here [A Legacy of Afrocentric, Decolonial, In-the-Life Theology and Bisexual Intersexional Philosophical Thought and Practice], but these all seem to be after this person passed away. I don't see much from when they were still alive. Oaktree b (talk) 02:46, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Sexuality and gender, Religion, California, New York, and Washington, D.C.. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:26, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
keep - hang on there is a 2023 festschrift dedicated to him - see, meeting WP:PROF criteria 1c Lajmmoore (talk) 10:37, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
comment I don't have time right now to work on it further, but these sources might help someone who does here, here (in Spanish), here Lajmmoore (talk) 10:45, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep anyone who gets a festschrift devoted to them (from non-fringe publications) is notable. Wow this article needs to be rewritten though, lot of NPOV issues PARAKANYAA (talk) 11:53, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of saints

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

List has no clear criteria for inclusion. And if we were to include every saint from the four Churches mentioned in the table, then it would be far too long. I've created a new article (Lists of saints) which should serve as a directory for lists of saints, so I believe List of Saints should become a redirect to that. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 15:15, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, Religion, and Christianity. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 15:15, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If this does get deleted, can we not delete the history and just put the new one over it/histmerge? I would rather not delete a 23 year article history if it can be avoided. Or redirect is fine too just keep the history. No opinion on the proposal itself. PARAKANYAA (talk) 15:22, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

why does the history matter? ―Howard • 🌽³³ 15:33, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

With pages this old and with this many sub pages, there's an extremely high likelihood this has been content split to some of the other saint lists at some point, so it would need to be kept historically for attribution reasons. Also historically interesting. PARAKANYAA (talk) 15:37, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can't answer if it should be either. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 16:24, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Lists of saints: This article should not exist in its current form, as it is way too painful to navigate. However, redirects are cheap, and I see no downside to preserving the page history. HyperAccelerated (talk) 23:48, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kaizenify (talk) 09:10, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Lists of saints per HyperAccelerated. Sensible ATD for this not terribly sensible list. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 09:25, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep meets WP:GNG for well-documented saints. Absolutiva (talk) 11:47, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This violates WP: INDISCRIMINATE. A subject can still meet WP: GNG and not have an article on the basis of violating WP: INDISCRIMINATE. As pointed out above, it's extremely painful to navigate and criteria for inclusion aren't clear. HyperAccelerated (talk) 14:58, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment if this list goes, and Lists of saints becomes the index-of-indices to articles about saints, then we should also get rid of List of saints (disambiguation), and merge its content into Lists of saints. It's not helpful to readers to have multiple articles/lists/pages with very similar names and unclear division of role. Better to have one landing-point that covers everything. Elemimele (talk) 12:38, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Feel free to nominate the disambiguation page for deletion then. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 12:43, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What about List of canonized saints? Absolutiva (talk) 13:19, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is this really the right venue to discuss what to do with other articles? I'm worried this discussion is about to become longer than the actual AfD. Talk pages and/or separate AfD pages are probably more appropriate. HyperAccelerated (talk) 14:53, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Religion Proposed deletions

Religion Templates

Atheism

Proposed deletions (WP:PROD)

Buddhism

Gar (music)

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

It is written as an original research, fails WP:ATD and Fails WP:SIGCOV Jinnllee90 (talk) 17:23, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Dance, Music, Buddhism, and China. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:42, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 November 22. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 17:49, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Clearly a WP:BEFORE was not done. Here is a book review of an entire book dedicated to this genre of music and dance in Tibet. There is also WP:SIGCOV in Jizeng, Mao (2001). "The Traditional Music of Tibet". In Robert C. Provine; Yosihiko Tokumaru; J. Lawrence Witzleben (eds.). The Garland Encyclopedia of World Music: East Asia: China, Japan, and Korea. Vol. Section IV: Music of China's National Minorities. Taylor & Francis. doi:10.1201/9781315086507. ISBN 9781315086507. Best.4meter4 (talk) 18:22, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kings of Shambhala

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

Seems to be wholly unsourced OR. Slatersteven (talk) 10:55, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Mythology and Buddhism. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:21, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Shambhala. CoconutOctopus talk 13:31, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kanja Odland

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

Conatins no independent sourcing, and what I could find was a Dagens Nyheter interview, which is mostly about her school of Buddhism and contains scant info in Odland herself, and participation in a Sveriges Radio show on meditation practices in Sweden. Insufficient in-depth and independent coverage. Draken Bowser (talk) 09:46, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Women, Buddhism, and Sweden. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:17, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edited article to include independent sourcing. Article meets criteria for inclusion of a biographical person based on:

- Coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other and independent of the subject (Dagens Nyheter, Sveriges Radio).

- Notability based on contribution to the enduring historical record in the field of Zen buddhism. Allllllice (talk) 14:25, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Allllllice is a major contributor to the article.

The article is a bit short, but includes links to articles about Buddhism (eg Philip Kapleau which mentions Odland under the lineage section) and some acceptable references. I'm sure there are other sources that could be included. I recommend that the article is retained. Manbooferie (talk) 17:15, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 09:58, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

- The first Dagens Nyheter article "Separation är världens sjuka" is a personal interview with the subject including direct questions such as "How did you become attracted to Buddhism?" so it is significant coverage rather than name-dropping.

- The second Dagens Nyheter ”Sante Poromaa, zenbuddist:” is an interview with the subject's co-teacher Sante Poromaa which includes relevant coverage of the subject. For example (translated):This means that he (along with his wife [Kanja Odland Roshi]) is now the highest ranking Zen Buddhist teacher in Sweden.

- The Sveriges Radio interview does not stand alone as evidence of notability but should be considered alongside the other sources.

- The book 2600 Years of Sambuddhatva: Global Journey of Awakening is a collection of essays on the history of buddhism published by the Sri Lankan government which addresses the subject in the section on Buddhism in Scandinavia.

It's true that some of the other sources you have listed are self-made or websites of related zen centers but, as I understand it, primary sources can be appropriate for non-controversial facts in an article about a person. See Wikipedia:Identifying and using primary sources#Primary sources should be used carefully Allllllice (talk) 09:06, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing in your contribution above, Allllllice, produces some kind of clear evidence of notability. I mean, I concur with your assessment of the "sources" more than I disagree! Yes, "self-made", "related zen centers [announcements]", "primary sources" only supporting existence (I do not disagree she has existed!), one "interview [which] does not stand alone as evidence of notability", and so forth. I submit I cannot, much as I try, fathom the persistence of support here. A zen teacher among hundreds of thousands, yes. -The Gnome (talk) 13:31, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps it would help if I clarify that, since Zen buddhism is a lineage-based tradition based on dharma transmission, to be a "teacher" has a specific meaning. The number of sanctioned teachers is limited (many orders of magnitude less than hundreds of thousands) and even more so for those with the title Roshi. I realise that this isn't evidence for notability in itself, but I hope it is useful as context. Allllllice (talk) 16:46, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Non-independent sources can be used as references with some caveats, but they do not count towards notability. None of the sources except "Separation är världens sjuka" are both independent and in-depth. "Sante Poromaa, zenbuddist" and " 2600 Years of Sambuddhatva: Global Journey of Awakening" are independent, but the first one offers no in-depth info on Odland and the second seems to suffer from the same problem (google-books won't let me see everything). We can't seem to get to three sources that satisfy the SIRS criteria. Draken Bowser (talk) 21:30, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Three best sources is helpful advice for those looking to demonstrate notability but it isn't a requirement. The criteria at WP:SIGCOV state that "There is no fixed number of sources required since sources vary in quality and depth of coverage, but multiple sources are generally expected." We have multiple independent sources here and agree that at least one of them is in-depth. Allllllice (talk) 17:15, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The subject appears to be recognized in international publications as an important Buddhist teacher in Scandanavia. I'm not seeing a particularly convincing source analysis as to why the sources in question don't meet out criteria at WP:SIGCOV.4meter4 (talk) 18:33, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 20:50, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I've now added an additional source: Larsson, L. Vägledare i svensk zenbuddhism. Buddhism-nu. 1/08. Temporarily uploaded here.

This is an interview with Kanja Odland from 2008 published in the Swedish buddhism magazine Buddhism-nu that ticks the boxes of significant coverage, reliable & independent. The article itself explains her notability (my translation):

[...] summer 2006 [...] Kanja received "Inka" (Dharma transmission) which is the final confirmation that Kanja is an independent sensei – teacher – with the right to freely teach and appoint her own successors. Which in itself is a unique event in the development of Buddhism in Sweden – that we now have a Swedish, female Zen teacher as a guide and role model.

We now have this together with the Dagens Nyheter interview, which we agreed is independent and in-depth, plus the other sources ("Sante Poromaa, zenbuddist" from Dagens Nyheter , "2600 Years of Sambuddhatva: Global Journey of Awakening", Sveriges Radio interview) which we agreed were independent. Allllllice (talk) 14:37, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Templates

Miscellaneous

Christianity

La Salle Secondary School, Kota Kinabalu

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

Fails WP:NSCHOOL. Ong Kai Jin (talk) 15:37, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, Christianity, and Malaysia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:38, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I don't think there is sufficient deletion rationale. This editor has nominated a large number of schools quickly - each one minutes after the last, which does not seem like nearly enough time spent of an WP:BEFORE. It has sourcing, and it needs searching, but I am not willing to spend considerable time searching for sources in a language I don't speak, when the only rationale given for all of these is "Fails WP:NSCHOOL" (copied and pasted on all the others). I would be willing to spend more time if the the nom. will show how they have conducted a WP:BEFORE and analysed sources available elsewhere for this prima facie notable school. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 15:55, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article, by content, to me is just WP:MILL. A search of "smk la salle kota kinabalu" on Google showed me no source featuring the school primarily on itself, and it just mentioned along other schools. Ong Kai Jin (talk) 17:43, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 November 22. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:01, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

La Salle School, Petaling Jaya

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

Fails WP:NSCHOOL. Ong Kai Jin (talk) 15:35, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, Christianity, and Malaysia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:36, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 November 22. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:01, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

La Salle School, Klang

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

Fails WP:NSCHOOL. Ong Kai Jin (talk) 15:32, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, Christianity, and Malaysia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:34, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 November 22. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 15:43, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Convent Taiping

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

Fails WP:NSCHOOL. Ong Kai Jin (talk) 14:13, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 November 22. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 14:29, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, Christianity, and Malaysia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:31, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

St Thomas Church, Nalukody

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

After doing WP:BEFORE, I cannot find any evidence of WP:SIGCOV or notability. Grahaml35 (talk) 14:09, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture, Christianity, and Kerala. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:28, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dachuna

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

contested PROD. a female Cornish Dachuna is only known from one singular mention by Hugh Candidus in a list of saints' resting places. i checked the Blair source as i have irl access to it, and the heading is "Summary list of late, non-English, or dubious saints who appear in the resting-place lists". according to Nicholas Orme's Saints of Cornwall,

The reference is presumably to Bodmin Priory, but no evidence survives from there about these saints, apart from Petroc. ... Dachuna is equally elusive in Cornwall, and a similar name in Ireland is male not female. ... In short, there is no certain Cornish context for these names; perhaps Hugh Candidus or his source conflated two places and ascribed saints to Bodmin who rightly belonged elsewhere.

there is no evidence that a female Cornish Dachuna ever existed. she is only known from one very dubious passing mention in a medieval source. fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. ... sawyer * he/they * talk 15:03, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Christianity and England. ... sawyer * he/they * talk 15:03, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Some of nominator's reasoning/historical commentary is a bit misguided, a lot of prominent subjects rely on a single source, Beowulf for instance is arguably one of those. Whether the saint itself ever existed as a person, who knows, but the cult did; like arguing Zeus didn't exist so the god's article should be deleted. Even the nomination shows that the subject is of scholarly interest. The saint's cult and commemoration are recorded in one of the major sources of information we have for early English saints. The article is a stub and needs more work, but that doesn't mean the subject isn't notable either. Ironically if the nominator had expended the same energy expanding the article as trying to get it deleted it might not be a stub, some of the info used above could be in the article in expounded form. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 15:15, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

that's not what i'm saying, and is entirely beside the point. there is nothing to add to this article, and there is no evidence beyond Hugh Candidus' brief mention that she existed and was buried at Bodmin, let alone that she had a cult or commemoration - scholarly sources, including the one you cited in the article, agree on that. ... sawyer * he/they * talk 15:21, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

that's not what i'm saying I don't know specifically what 'that' means here, but everything I've said addresses the points you've raised. there is nothing to add to this article How do you know what can be added to the article? Your reasoning is misguided, just because there is only one source doesn't mean there is nothing more to be said. It's also clearly wrong as a statement, you could have added the quote above to the article, for instance, instead of using it here. Again, misspent effort. An established, culted medieval saint is intrinsically notable and there will be more scholarship, either material existing but unused or in the future. I find the logic and motivation here alarming, you would clear out so many important articles on Wikipedia. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 15:37, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

this is not an "established, culted medieval saint". that is what the very sparse sourcing says - that this was probably a mistake on Hugh's part. and i know that there is nothing to add because i've looked for good sourcing on this saint, and have come up very short. Dachuna does not even have her own entry in the very, very thorough and authoritative Orme book, nor does she have any dedications, known feast days, or folklore. the only thing we know about this supposed saint is where she was supposedly buried, from one singular passing mention. please do not speculate about my motivations, either. ... sawyer * he/they * talk 15:49, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It might be useful if people here who aren't historians stop commenting on the historicity of the saint, you don't know what you are talking about. Because a commentator speculates that it might be a mistake by Hugh, that's not the last word, we do not have satisfactory let alone exhaustive source coverage of religion in 12th century Cornwall. Also if you did have any kind of expertise on Insular saints cults you'd know that they frequently spawn dopplegangers, gender changes, etc, etc, doesn't mean they are not notable. St Kentigern of Glasgow was likely a gender change, St Ninian of Whithorn is likely a doppleganger/invention (based on recent scholarship). Also, you've made your motivation clear, you are posting here because you want this deleted, right, what's there for me to 'speculate' about? Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 15:53, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Deacon of Pndapetzim, can you give us your WP:THREE best sources that would show that the subject meets the notability guidelines at WP:GNG? That would help bring this discussion back on track. -- asilvering (talk) 23:27, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Hugh Candidus and add mention of these dubious saints there as an AtD. (edit conflict) I concur with Sawyer's assessment here that a full article on an almost certainly non-existent saint should not warrant an article when coverage has been so sparse and exclusively focused on the likely falsity of the original claim. However, saint articles have a tendency to reappear due to the general assumption of notability many editors believe they have. A redirect that indicates the spurious origin may stave off any misguided efforts to revive the page. ~ Pbritti (talk) 15:18, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It might be useful if people here who aren't historians stop commenting on the historicity of the saint, neither of you know what you are talking about. I don't mean to sound patronising, but the source problems here and the historical issues surrounding the evolution of saints cults are very complex. Also, why would you redirect it to Hugh Candidus? Surely if you were going to delete it you'd just redirect it to List of Cornish saints or List of Anglo-Saxon saints?Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 15:20, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Funny you should say that, as I am a historian. You have managed to be patronizing and seem to be taking this AfD far too personally. Your redirect suggestions are inappropriate targets due to the unlikely historicity and singular reference of this purported saint. ~ Pbritti (talk) 16:30, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not taking it personally at all. Why are the redirect suggestions 'inappropriate'? Listen, if you want to call yourself a historian because you did a history degree I'm not going to argue, but my points stands, these issues are specialised and complex, I'm sorry if this hurts your feelings but this is a public encyclopedia used by millions of people and the lack of relevant competence is important....but unfortunately if you don't recognise it yourself pointing it out any further is likely to be a waste of time on my part. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 17:58, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - especially if the information from Orme's Saints of Cornwall is added (which it should be). Yes, it's a sparse article, but that's not exactly unusual in medieval subjects. It is a bit of a borderline case, but yes, there does appear enough for me to consider this worth an article. I do not consider Hugh Candidus a good redirect target - that would imply that Hugh had some connection to this purported saint, where he is just the source. Ealdgyth (talk) 17:19, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do you think it might be worth noting that you were canvassed (diff) for participation in this AfD? ~ Pbritti (talk) 17:22, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please note my reply at Deacon's talk page - here addressing my knowing about this AfD before Deacon posted on my talk page. (I've long had Deacon's TP watchlisted - you might note the yearly Saturnalia posts that date back many years for him (and most everyone else where I have their userpages watchlisted) Ealdgyth (talk) 17:38, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pbritti, you are approaching this the wrong way, we are people with long-established interests in these articles. Ealdgyth isn't going to be 'canvassed' by anyone, let alone me. When I last checked she was one of the main contributors to articles on English Christianity. 10os articles in which she has an interest could be negatively affected by this selective attempt to impose deletionist maximalism on a relevant article. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 17:49, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ealdgyth: Your response is a bit ridiculous when you only !voted here after being canvassed, failed to acknowledge that, and have not !voted in an AfD in over a year (and only five in the last five years). @Deacon of Pndapetzim: you explicitly sought the aid of a friendly editor, which is canvassing. I'll take this up with WP:AN next. ~ Pbritti (talk) 18:26, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please WP:AGF. I will mention the discussion to anyone I think might be interested, I had no idea if Ealdgyth would agree with me or not, I didn't want this discussion to have no input from knowledgable people & just be me and the two of you. If I'd wanted to perform some wicked evil conspiracy on you I could have emailed her or lots of other people & you wouldn't have had a clue, seriously get a grip . Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 18:31, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

in the interest of fairness, i have added what little is available from Orme's book. i do not have access to the Jankulak book so i have no idea if there's more information in there. i stand by my nomination for deletion, however; i do not believe this is enough for a standalone article. ... sawyer * he/they * talk 17:53, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete What's in the article right now really looks like, at best, passing mention in a single book. I would suggest that, unless significant improvement can be made to citation quality, there's not enough here to support a separate article. It's never going to be more than a stub. Suggest merging any relevant information into Saint Petroc. Simonm223 (talk) 19:13, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Petroc seems like a reasonable merge/redirect target to me. ... sawyer * he/they * talk 19:14, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: A single passing mention is not enough to establish notability, despite some votes based on hypotheticals provided above. You don't need to be a historian, despite what one user claims, to realize that a lack of sources is worth considering. I do not have any objection to a redirect given the provided context. Hey man im josh (talk) 20:39, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per ATD, but not to Candidus or S. Petroc—where it would be UNDUE to contain what we have on a discrete saint, but rather to List of Anglo-Saxon saints, where Dachuna already has a slot. A list also created by The Historian™, so please present your diplomas on the door before commenting :) SerialNumber54129 14:19, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
didn't realize she already was listed there; i've been working on sorting out the Cornish saints topic, not A-S saints, so i hadn't noticed. i concur that that's probably the best redirect target ... sawyer * he/they * talk 14:24, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Serial Number 54129 has raised a good question about whether Dachuna's origin there should be "British", "Anglo-Saxon", or "Saxon", which the learned historians here may be interested in weighing in on. CMD (talk) 01:44, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
it is a good question, and as a not-learned not-historian i have some nonsense to contribute. Orme says Dachuna's name, unique in Cornwall/England, is similar to some saints found in Ireland, but that connection may be purely superficial. as she's just a (dubious) name in a list, it's not clear whether she would have been Cornish (Celtic-speaking) or Anglo-Saxon. "British" would probably be the least OR-y. at the same time, whether the A-S saints list should only include standalone articles is another question - i'd probably say yes, but i don't plan on working on that list for the time being and it's a bit out of scope of this AfD. ... sawyer * he/they * talk 10:31, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Sawyer777:, I apologize for picking on your redirect suggestion! Was not meant to be a personal criticism at all. Sorry! SerialNumber54129 10:38, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
oh that's not at all how i read it! you're so good! ... sawyer * he/they * talk 10:39, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect but to a different target than suggested thus far: St Petroc's Church, Bodmin. Every secondary source on Dachuna refers only to Candidus' passing mention, so the only thing we can verify about her(?) is that she was said by Candidus to be buried at Bodmin Priory, where she was an associate of Petroc. I've added a line and reference about Credan, Medan and Dachuna on my proposed target, so it's a suitable redirect. This avoids the WP:UNDUE problems of redirecting to Candidus or Petroc and the identification problems of placing a Cornish saint on a list of Anglo-Saxons. Regardless of where it's redirected, there's no plausible grounds to keep this as a standalone page. The sourcing would indicate "delete," but I think Pbritti is right that a redirect would help guard against well-intentioned efforts to recreate the page. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:40, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
i wasn't expecting such lively (can you call it lively?) debate about where to redirect this. i think you make the best case so far. ... sawyer * he/they * talk 18:31, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Ealdgyth and noting that inclusion on the Candidus list is itself adequately notable. The article itself explains the limitations of the source material. For medieval women, there are never a lot of sources. We also don’t seem to have anything like a “list of Saint’s resting places” on Wiki, which would actually be a somewhat plausible redirect to move the contents for stubs like this, but given we don’t, the content itself is worth preserving. Also must note we have already spent more bandwidth discussing this RfD than it is taking up on “teh wiki”. Montanabw^(talk) 20:35, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Saint Benedict School of Novaliches

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

No sources since 2010. Only references online are primary or social media about the school. Smallangryplanet (talk) 14:45, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and Philippines. Smallangryplanet (talk) 14:45, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:30, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Would a redirect to Caloocan#Education be appropriate you reckon? Procyon117 (talk) 15:04, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I think that could work. Smallangryplanet (talk) 09:52, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Caloocan#Education per Procyon117. Royiswariii Talk! 10:45, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Caloocan#Education per Procyon117. Besides being unreferenced, the school is not notable enough to have its stand-alone article. AstrooKai (Talk) 21:45, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Red Cord Records

AfDs for this article:

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

I am also nominating

Falls short of WP:NCORP. Previously deleted with unanimous delete consensus in 2012. I'm not seeing happenings resulting in coverages in the 12 years since then that puts this company above the NCORP threshold. After it was deleted, it was re-created by a long-term undisclosed paid editor with promotional PR activity involvment. The additional sources with newer dates than the previous AfD are basically "did this..." "released this..." WP:ROUTINE events. Graywalls (talk) 04:40, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Companies, Christianity, and Illinois. Graywalls (talk) 04:40, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The coverage is all about signings, but not really about the company itself. Fails WP:ORGCRIT.4meter4 (talk) 05:36, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Wyoming-related deletion discussions. Graywalls (talk) 05:41, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of saints

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

List has no clear criteria for inclusion. And if we were to include every saint from the four Churches mentioned in the table, then it would be far too long. I've created a new article (Lists of saints) which should serve as a directory for lists of saints, so I believe List of Saints should become a redirect to that. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 15:15, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, Religion, and Christianity. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 15:15, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If this does get deleted, can we not delete the history and just put the new one over it/histmerge? I would rather not delete a 23 year article history if it can be avoided. Or redirect is fine too just keep the history. No opinion on the proposal itself. PARAKANYAA (talk) 15:22, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

why does the history matter? ―Howard • 🌽³³ 15:33, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

With pages this old and with this many sub pages, there's an extremely high likelihood this has been content split to some of the other saint lists at some point, so it would need to be kept historically for attribution reasons. Also historically interesting. PARAKANYAA (talk) 15:37, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can't answer if it should be either. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 16:24, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Lists of saints: This article should not exist in its current form, as it is way too painful to navigate. However, redirects are cheap, and I see no downside to preserving the page history. HyperAccelerated (talk) 23:48, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kaizenify (talk) 09:10, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Lists of saints per HyperAccelerated. Sensible ATD for this not terribly sensible list. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 09:25, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep meets WP:GNG for well-documented saints. Absolutiva (talk) 11:47, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This violates WP: INDISCRIMINATE. A subject can still meet WP: GNG and not have an article on the basis of violating WP: INDISCRIMINATE. As pointed out above, it's extremely painful to navigate and criteria for inclusion aren't clear. HyperAccelerated (talk) 14:58, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment if this list goes, and Lists of saints becomes the index-of-indices to articles about saints, then we should also get rid of List of saints (disambiguation), and merge its content into Lists of saints. It's not helpful to readers to have multiple articles/lists/pages with very similar names and unclear division of role. Better to have one landing-point that covers everything. Elemimele (talk) 12:38, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Feel free to nominate the disambiguation page for deletion then. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 12:43, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What about List of canonized saints? Absolutiva (talk) 13:19, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is this really the right venue to discuss what to do with other articles? I'm worried this discussion is about to become longer than the actual AfD. Talk pages and/or separate AfD pages are probably more appropriate. HyperAccelerated (talk) 14:53, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Christianity Proposed deletions (WP:PROD)

Sweden Yearly Meeting (via WP:PROD on 6 November 2024)

Categories for discussion

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

Miscellaneous

Hinduism

Muthappan Kavu

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

No sources for this village itself since 2009, possibly needs a rename if not a delete? I can find lots of references to the festival and to Muthappan, but the only one I can find for this village in particular is this wiki article. Smallangryplanet (talk) 11:25, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Hinduism, India, and Kerala. Smallangryplanet (talk) 11:25, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 12:02, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, or possibly re-write. No evidence of notability. I have found a few sources referencing a temple of this name, but not a village. I can't even find anything with this name, let along a village, located on Google Maps, Bing Maps, or Apple Maps. I was able to find a temple with the name "Muthappan Kavu" on OpenStreetMaps, but not a village. Whoever created this article may have been talking about the Muthappan Kavu temple. A re-write or recreation of the article about the temple of the same name might be a possible alternative to deletion, but the temple is of questionable notability, too. GranCavallo (talk) 15:52, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or redirect to Muthappan. All signs point to: Muthappan Kavu is not a village. At first I was going to suggest redirecting to Memunda, since the article about Memunda already mentions Muthappan Kavu as a local "religious attraction". But as it turns out, in Google Maps you can find multiple places of worship with Muthappan Kavu in the name across multiple locations, and this article in The Hindu uses it is a generic term. There is, however, a Muthappan Kavu Road (not notable). Cielquiparle (talk) 05:06, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:GNG, I did an extensive check when trying to find sources for this in English and Malayalam and couldn't, only things like this. Coeusin (talk) 06:44, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No sources on the page and I can not find any significant coverage on this village to pass notability. Fails WP:GNG. RangersRus (talk) 14:16, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:V. I just had a conversation today at Wikimedia NYC about all these alleged human habitations that were created from gazetteers that were inaccurate. Bearian (talk) 03:44, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lingayat Vani

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

This article is a POV fork of Lingayatism, created using WP:SYNTHESIS of poor sources to glorify Vaishya Vani caste while conflating it with a different community (Lingayats). Most sources and even most of the article only concerns Lingayats and not Vanis. - Ratnahastin (talk) 08:49, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Ethnic groups, Hinduism, and Maharashtra. Shellwood (talk) 11:12, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ratnahastin Thank you for initiating this discussion. I would like to address the points raised in the nomination and demonstrate how the article meets Wikipedia's guidelines on notability, neutrality, and verifiability.

1) Not a POV Fork

The topic "Lingayat Vani" is distinct from "Lingayatism" and warrants its own article. While Lingayat Vani has historical and cultural links to Lingayatism, it represents a specific community with unique socio-economic and cultural characteristics. This is supported by independent and reliable sources cited in the article.

The overlap with Lingayatism is a necessary background to provide context, but the article focuses on the Vani subgroup, not the broader religious identity. Such differentiation is aligned with Wikipedia's standards for splitting articles where subtopics merit detailed discussion.

2) No Synthesis or Original Research

The content adheres strictly to Wikipedia:SYNTHESIS. Each claim in the article is directly supported by sources. There is no combining of unrelated points to create new interpretations. Where sources discuss Lingayatism as part of the Vani community's background, it is presented as such, not conflated or misrepresented.

3) Neutral Point of View

The article's tone and structure aim to neutrally document the historical, cultural, and social aspects of the Lingayat Vani community. If there are any specific instances of perceived bias, they can be flagged for improvement.

4) To all the respected Administrators.

I believe the article on "Lingayat Vani" satisfies Wikipedia's core content policies and deserves to remain as a standalone page. I am happy to address any specific concerns or collaborate on improving the article further. PerspicazHistorian (talk) 14:24, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This comment is entirely AI generated. Please do not use chatbots, you should convey your views in your own words. - Ratnahastin (talk) 14:40, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ratnahastin Yes I agree I used chat gpt for this reply, I avoid using chatbots for such conversations. But believe me It has been a great time since sockpuppets have been trying to delete the article. I used chatbot in my reply as it saved some time. As a matter of fact even for the chatbot to provide a valid response It needs facts from my side. I sincerely apologize for using it and will never use it again on such discussions. I didn't knew we can't use it here. But I still abide by the views I shared in my prior comment. Thank You ! PerspicazHistorian (talk) 14:51, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just because you think the article is trying to "Glorify" a community, It doesn't mean it. It is a neutral documentation of cultural aspects of the community. I agree to edit anything if necessary, please initiate it in talk page before, rather than abruptly deleting it. PerspicazHistorian (talk) 14:55, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ratnahastin Please see: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Lingayat Vani

I sincerely agree to further cooperate if anything directly or indirectly tries to glorify or exaggerate something. Please create a discussion for such topics. Thank You ! PerspicazHistorian (talk) 15:15, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Bradv Hi again. Please tell how can I remove AFD tag from the article . I made some improvements in the articles that make it better and will keep adding later on. Currently I am a part time editor on wikipedia, I don't know how and when to remove it. @Ratnahastin is also not replying. Thanks for your help ! PerspicazHistorian (talk) 17:00, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It will be removed automatically when this discussion concludes, at least one week from today. – bradv 17:03, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sikhareswar Mandir, Baldiabandha, Dhenkanal, Odisha

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

Exists in draftspace as well. Totally unsourced, and a WP:BEFORE search failed. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 21:58, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Hinduism and Odisha. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 21:58, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A shrine of Lord Sikhareswar in village Baldiabandha ia a well-known temple .Though not much publicity in newspapers/social media is there. Over the years, this religious institution has come up as a centre for Saivite worship.It is a green temple in serene natural environment in Dhenkanal.I earnestly submit to you consider this stub article,a part of subaltern history of this region.

Warm regards and gratitude JAMKUM (talk) 07:21, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Google News reveals nothing same goes with books and the article is written like an advert. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 00:29, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also I Draftify this because of that. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 00:30, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: There’s something going on, and it’s impossible to determine if it’s being done in good faith (so we need to WP:AGF). IP editors are leaving comments on the talk page of the article and AfD begging for this article to be kept. I can understand one or two IP editors doing this, editing logged out out of principle is A Thing, but I’ve never seen this many IP editors do this. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 16:02, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Undoubtedly there are people who are connected in some way to this temple that don't want the article deleted. It happens.4meter4 (talk) 01:44, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@4meter4 Perhaps! It's stopped, regardless. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 02:18, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails WP:SIGCOV. In doing a WP:BEFORE search, I located many sources which had SIGCOV of the Sikhareswar Mandir in Guwahati, Assam but could locate no sources about the temple of the same name in Baldiabandha, Dhenkanal, Odisha. I searched under all three names separately just in case and got zero hits. It's possible there are sources in the Odia language (the official language of that part of India) but that is beyond my skill set. Without evidence on this temple, and with the url links in the article not covering the temple, we have no choice but to delete.4meter4 (talk) 01:44, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Let's give it one more week. IP editors: you need to provide sources if you want this to be kept (see WP:42), or offer an WP:ATD.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 02:58, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sir,

Thanks for benign consideration. JAMKUM (talk) 10:41, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Clearly fails WP:SIGCOV.--— MimsMENTOR ^talk 16:03, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Templates

Miscellaneous

Hinduism Proposed deletions (WP:PROD)

Islam

List of Hindustani Muslim Heroes

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

Contested draft, not a neutral title, and entirely unsourced. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 20:17, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, Islam, and India. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 20:17, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Title has been changed and references added. As there are a lot of names it will take some time to add all the references. All the names have wikipedia links that have references . Information written is taken from those verified wikipedia pages of those people. Paadripaadri (talk) 21:34, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was speedy delete‎. I have checked those of its supposed references as are accessible, searched for information about the other cited sources, some of which don't appear to exist, made my own searches for information relating to the content of the article, and studied the editing history of the editor who created the article. The outcome of those investigations was that this is clearly a hoax. JBW (talk) 17:50, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Qajar-Wahhabi War

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

After checking a bit the sources of this article, it seems that this page is just dealing with some events that are not backed by WP:RS and should be deleted. ---Wikaviani ^{(talk) (contribs)} 16:00, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, Islam, Middle East, Iran, Oman, and Saudi Arabia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:36, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Ma'ahad Muhammadi Lelaki

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

Fails WP:NSCHOOL. Ong Kai Jin (talk) 15:40, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, Islam, and Malaysia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:53, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 November 22. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:02, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Sikhism

Giani Harpreet Singh

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

Sources provide only routine coverage to this individual which is no different than WP:NOTNEWS. Many other Jathedars of Akal Takht also don't have separate articles. Ratnahastin (talk) 16:42, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Sikhism, and Punjab. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:41, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retain the page- Most of the jathedar has wikipedia pages and He remained the head of Akal Takht the highest seat of Sikh Community. Wikiravidas (talk) 00:33, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The argument "he is certainly notable" does not carry any weight. -The Gnome (talk) 20:04, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Arguments should focus on policy-based reasons and the quality of the sourcing.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:56, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep as the BLP of the subject passes GNG. The nominator should have done a BEFORE. — Mister Banker (talk) 21:33, 9 November 2024 (UTC)~~[reply]

Mister Banker has been indefinitely blocked for abusing multiple accounts.

Mister Banker, can you be more specific as to which sources help establish GNG? Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:35, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz: The subject is a WP:PUBLICFIGURE who is the appointed head of the highest temporal seat of Sikhs and to whom India's second highest category security was granted by the Indian government (The Economic Times, Times Now). He has also received other coverage over the years. See: The Quint, The Quint, NDTV, ABP LIVE, Business Standard — Mister Banker (talk) 12:59, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All of these are WP:NEWSORGINDIA, therefore not usable for establishing notability. - Ratnahastin (talk) 13:03, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's not. Have you even read what NEWSORGINDIA says? You need to show how this coverage falls under it. Simply saying it does, just doesn't cut it. — Mister Banker (talk) 17:12, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your response, Mister Banker. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:51, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your first two sources only talk about granting Z security to him[2][3] and his refusal, they do not provide any other information about him. The rest of the coverage you are talking about is only due to his controversial statements over the years[4][5], this too is only about the statement he made , this source is only reporting his statement on his wife's arrest at the airport without providing any additional coverage about him, none of these sources have in-depth or significant coverage of his life beyond rudimentary attention to his controversial statements. My rationale still stands, he is only getting occasional news worthy coverage only due to his statements not because he is independently notable. - Ratnahastin (talk) 05:49, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In short, you have agreed that WP:NEWSORGINDIA doesn't apply here and that he is notable enough that the media seems it worthy to provide coverage to his statements which can be added to the article to let the readers know about his stance on socio-political matters. — Mister Banker (talk) 13:52, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:GNG. Lorstaking (talk)
Keep, from the sources it seems to qualify WP:GNG.Also, Akal Takht is the supreme religious authority in Sikhism and we have wikipedia articles for the head and members of such religious authorities.Adamantine123 (talk) 17:21, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Arguments such as "there is similar stuff elsewhere in Wikipedia" or "he is just notable, we all know this" are not worth much. -The Gnome (talk) 11:33, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, agreed with @Adamantine123. Also there are cited enough reliable sources to support the BLP' article to meet GNG. MSLQr (talk) 19:38, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But what are those sources that establish GNG? - Ratnahastin (talk) 05:49, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. It's a clearly promotional text, lacking sources that would support the subject's notability. Fails WP:GNG, despite all the chaff. The plethora of SPA's curating it does not help much. -The Gnome (talk) 20:04, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Had little coverage for controversial statements, but that does not help in establishing GNG. Dympies (talk) 08:30, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, same as what Adamantine123 said. In addition it also appears to be decently well sourced. S302921 (talk) 21:10, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Once more: Arguments such as "there is similar stuff elsewhere in Wikipedia" or "surely, there are sources" just do not amount to much. -The Gnome (talk) 11:33, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. The keeps above fail to explain how the subject is notable. ArvindPalaskar (talk) 13:03, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Singh is the primary subject in multiple news stories in national papers in India which span several years. This would seem to meet the WP:SIGCOV guidelines for proving notability through independent significant coverage. Newspaper articles are routinely used to prove WP:GNG at wikipedia; so dismissing newspapers outright as not relevant seems spurious.4meter4 (talk) 16:44, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Show the sources. WP:NOTNEWS is very clear on routine coverage. Vague hand waves won't work. - Ratnahastin (talk) 16:59, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. As one participant says here, if this subject is notable, then "show the sources". Making claims of notabiity without highlighting evidence, either existing in the article or brought to this discussion, are empty.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:36, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: There are currently 11 sources in this page. I think that's more than good enough for this page. According to the second source on the page he was featured in Hindustan Times. (I would like to apologise for any formatting errors) S302921 (talk) 09:53, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But none of them address any of the concerns of the nomination. - Ratnahastin (talk) 10:07, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Many other Jathedars of Akal Takht also don't have separate articles." is not a good argument. We don't have articles for Every single number. He was referenced in multiple sources listed on the page and his page has plenty of content on it. S302921 (talk) 15:12, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please re-check WP:OVERKILL. None of the sources crowding the wavelength address the nomination's concerns. -The Gnome (talk) 11:34, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you could argue that, but my point still stands. His article has plenty of information available to keep his page. S302921 (talk) 20:32, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Nom is right, there is some routine coverage of the subject's appointment as the jathedar of the Akal Takht in Indian media, of the type that the policy requires us to discount. WP:SIGCOV for the subject is missing. MBlaze Lightning (talk) 15:11, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Akal Takht is the supreme body of the Sikh religion, and Giani Harpreet Singh represented more than 25 million Sikhs worldwide. He is also a person responsible for imposing religious punishment on former Deputy Chief Minister of Punjab named Sukhbir Singh Badal, and due to this punishment, the deputy chief minister can't participate in any religious or social activity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiravidas (talk • contribs) 01:34, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Being a Jathedar does not make one notable. - Ratnahastin (talk) 00:36, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Per NBASIC and PUBLICFIGURE, sources satisfies the requirements for notable status. Furthermore, his appointment as Jathedar of the Akal Takht, a prestigious office in Sikhism, underscores his significance. ®asteem Talk 20:34, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Did you even read pages you are pointing to? NBASIC clearly states that BLP requires "significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject", not a single source has been provided that does that. WP:PUBLICFIGURE is not even relevant here, it pertains to mentioning well documented allegations in reliable sources if the subject is a public figure as opposed to WP:BLPCRIME which forbids it for non public figures. Being a jathedar does not make one automatically notable. - Ratnahastin (talk) 00:35, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Suggestion: We already have enough null & void arguments to last us a year. Could we please stop with the claims that our subject "is surely notable" or that "certainly, sources exist"? It has been registered quite clearly that the subject is well loved. Let's please allow the process to conclude. -The Gnome (talk) 11:34, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete non-notable Khalistan figure. The above empty indications of notability by "keep" supporters is unconvincing. Nxcrypto Message 06:00, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As said above Giani Harpreet Singh represented more than 25 million Sikhs worldwide. He has numerous source on his page to keep it. S302921 (talk) 15:43, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Miscellaneous