Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ssejsantokotha

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. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 16:24, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ssejsantokotha

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

Feel free to peruse for sources in Google Books and Google News, or even the regular Google. I found nothing, nothing at all, for either term, Ssejsantokotha or Smritokotha (besides wikimirrors and some odd website also in the EL section). Drmies (talk) 15:13, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I have also failed to source, having started to look when I raised this article on the nom's talk page. It appears to be a "divine revelation" and, judging from descriptions past and present in an article that links to it, is quite probably a fringe theory. - Sitush (talk) 15:19, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I was unable to find discussion in any reliable sources, and most material that comes up through a variety of Google searches appears to be mirroring of the Wikipedia article. The article is impenetrably dense, poorly written, and does not reflect the neutral point of view. If someone can demonstrate notability, the article should be trimmed to a neutral stub and entirely rewritten. Cullen328 (talk) 15:46, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I see that Lady of Shalott and Drmies have pruned the article significantly since I first looked at it yesterday. I admit I didn't read every word, but at least I skimmed it. Well done. Cullen328 (talk) 15:53, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions. — I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} 18:13, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Spirituality-related deletion discussions. — I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} 18:15, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Lacks reliable independent sources needed to show notability. Edward321 (talk) 19:02, 16 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No notability, much less reliable sources to establish notability. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 02:48, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The text is better, but there's still no reliable independent sources needed to show notability Stuartyeates (talk) 04:51, 23 July 2011 (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.