Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gauranga dasa (RNS)

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 delete. Unfortunately this hasn't been a very thorough discussion, but as it's already been extended twice, I don't think it's going to get any more thorough. If there had been any objection to the article's deletion, this could perhaps be closed as no consensus. Absent any such objection, I believe such a closing would be disingenuous. faithless (^speak) 06:21, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gauranga dasa (RNS)

Gauranga dasa (RNS) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Vanity page for non notable individual. Ism schism (talk) 01:08, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions. —Ism schism (talk) 01:10, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. —Ism schism (talk) 01:11, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Non notable vanity page. Ism schism (talk) 01:12, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I wouldn't describe this as a vanity page, but I did wonder about the notability myself when moving it from an older version with an incorrect article name. Gauranga dasa is well known within Mumbai, but outside of India I'm not sure if his notability would be enough to warrant keeping the article? Gouranga(UK) (talk) 12:38, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete I could not find many references lectures of him on iskcondesiretree.com web of Chowpati - besides an odd audio link.MBest-son (talk) 15:09, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment "ISKCON Desire Tree" could be a questionable source. I have added it to the reliable sources notice board at [1]. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 17:10, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment It seems to me that ISKON is a sufficiently notable religion that its leading figures warrant articles based on their position. The difficulty with this approach is identifying who is actually a leading figure. It is difficult for a non-Hindu to sort through the wave of titles and honorifics. Could someone be so kind as to (a) explain this individual's position within the movement, and (b) explain what sources show this? Thanks, --Shirahadasha (talk) 02:08, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gauranga dasa is a disciple of Radhanath Swami, who is in turn a disciple of ISKCON's founder A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada. His position within the movement would generally be considered lower than that of a Swami, or GBC member. He is however a temple president of Radha-Gopinath Temple in Mumbai, and in the local Mumbai area is a particularly successful preacher, appearing on some Indian TV shows etc..., and giving talks in the top universities. Would his appearance within the Media if established through sources be enough to warrant an article? Otherwise I doubt if we will be able to source any more details. Regards, Gouranga(UK) (talk) 17:31, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment on him in the media (by others) would definitely establish ntability. Regular appearance in the media in regular publications/broadcasts (not his own) could as well. Best, --Shirahadasha (talk) 20:23, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jerry talk ¤ count/logs 20:33, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Gauranga dasa (RNS) is NOT a member of the Governing Body Commission. Please see, [2]. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 00:19, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 16:15, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete I'm wiling to accept that being head of one of their temples is notability, but he is only "vice president and senior monk" of one/ That wouldnt amount to notability for any religion or other intsitution either. DGG (talk) 09:21, 2 March 2008 (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.