Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Srila Prabhupada: The Prominent Link

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. Eluchil404 (talk) 20:41, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Srila Prabhupada: The Prominent Link

Book advertisemet with no reliable third party sources. Article is an advertisement for a non notable book. Also, does not meet the standards of Wikipedia:Reliable sources. Ism schism (talk) 04:18, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Strong delete Non notable book advertisement. Ism schism (talk) 04:20, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. —Ism schism (talk) 04:26, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions. —Ism schism (talk) 04:26, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. —Ism schism (talk) 04:26, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. —Ism schism (talk) 04:26, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Agree with above - the article does not mention who the book is published by, and if it even has an ISBN. Regards, Gouranga(UK) (talk) 20:56, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Mild Keep Notable, needs a rewrite. I think that the controversy surrounding this book makes it notable, that so many are stirred to action, article should focus on the NPOV of the controversy not just provide links to forum topics. Syama (talk) 17:13, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - It fails WP:NOTE (I think) and has little useful information. I wouldn't call it an ad, though the main text of the article covers little more than a description you might see in an ISKCON book catalog. --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 05:55, 21 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.