Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rama Ekadashi

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. Courcelles 01:55, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rama Ekadashi

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

No refs, does not indicate notability. There are lots of other days out there. See Putrada Pausha-shukla Ekadashi for a similar rationale. :| TelCo NaSpVe :| 01:44, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:54, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This article was created by an editor who thought that all the Ekadashis should have separate articles. He made articles for them all (apart from the three that already had them) but they all had more or less the same text. He failed to indicate any specific distinguishing features for each one other than its place in the calendar, which is already covered by the table in the main article. This is the only one not yet to be deleted. If there is anything significant that occurs specifically on this one Ekadashi then that could justify an article (although not this POV mess) but if not then it should be deleted. --DanielRigal (talk) 08:35, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No proof of significance, that makes it different from other Ekadashis. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 06:39, 4 September 2010 (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.