Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/HH Bhakti Svarupa Damodar Swami

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 keep. \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 18:32, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

HH Bhakti Svarupa Damodar Swami

HH Bhakti Svarupa Damodar Swami (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Insufficient notability. Article is an unsourced and unencyclopedic promotion full of unsubstantiated assertions. ChildofMidnight (talk) 18:48, 21 June 2009 (UTC) I see the article has been redirected to Bhaktisvarupa Damodar Swami which is an exact duplicate creation of the same article. So that one should be consdered in this AfD. ChildofMidnight (talk) 01:54, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:59, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete can find only trivial mentions in reliable sources and article makes no use of reliable sources at all to approach WP:BIO - a vanity page. Hekerui (talk) 00:58, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Delete The newly inserted references seem to establish notability Rirunmot (talk) 19:32, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Quick note Gnews has 23 hits by his title, there should be more under different spelling variations. -SpacemanSpiff (talk) 03:52, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Vaishnava News is an outlet of the Hare Krishna movement, not reliable, and what's left is either other people with the same name or trivial mentions. Hekerui (talk) 09:54, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Vaishnava News is not affiliated with Hare Krishna movement. It is an independent source.--Gaura79 (talk) 19:01, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I have just added independent reliable sources. --Gaura79 (talk) 19:01, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep An influential religious figure whose career expands outside his own domain. Well-written article, too. Shii (tock) 00:18, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question: How are http://www.tdsingh.org/, http://www.metanexus.net/, http://www.amislam.com/, http://www.kanglaonline.com/, http://www.uri.org/, http://www.binstitute.net/, and http://www.bhaktiswarupadamodara.com/ reliable sources? Hekerui (talk) 08:05, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There're enough independent sources cited in the article to establish notability. Plus for more than 30 years he was a director of Bhaktivedanta Institute, an organization that is certainly notable.--Gaura79 (talk) 09:46, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep While I think none of his contributions as an author, scientist, organizational head, spiritual leader are individually enough to qualify him under WP:AUTHOR, WP:ACADEMIC etc, in totality he does seem to meet WP:GNG and there are enough sources to write a bio. The current article needs work though to emphasize coverage from secondary sources instead of his self-written profile at www.metanexus.net etc. Abecedare (talk) 18:34, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Notable enough religious leader. Article could use better sourcing and neutral writing, as with many of these types of articles, but that's not enough to delete. Priyanath talk 01:59, 4 July 2009 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/HH_Bhakti_Svarupa_Damodar_Swami&oldid=1069654114"