Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yamai Devi, Rashin Ahmednagar

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. Sandstein 13:14, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yamai Devi, Rashin Ahmednagar

Yamai Devi, Rashin Ahmednagar (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Per my PROD, I cannot find anything on it to make it considered WP:NOTE. Jerod Lycett (talk) 04:46, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions. Jerod Lycett (talk) 04:46, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 06:19, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:29, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:30, 8 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment -- If kept, rename to something like Jagdamba Mata temple, Rashin. Nevertheless, it is said to be based on a book, but what book is not stated. We regularly delete articles on local churches as NN. I see nothing in this article to demonstrate that it is WP notable. Hence I lean towards delete, but I do not know enough to vote. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:25, 10 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - it was I who challenged the PROD, simply because I had intended to copy it to my own space before it disappeared but forgot, so had to call it back. As it stands it's probably not possible to salvage, but it's quite a well-known temple and I would be surprised if there were not other sources besides the book mentioned. I don't have the time to look now, so would not oppose deletion, but with the possibility of re-creation later if more does turn up. Ingratis (talk) 21:18, 10 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am not opposed to moving it into Draft-space. Jerod Lycett (talk) 11:53, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks but no need - I don't work with Drafts. Ingratis (talk) 15:11, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete WP:TNT and start again. No easily available sourcing to even make a start at fixing it. Mattg82 (talk) 23:02, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Fails general notability guidelines – at least in English. I'm happy to re-evaluate if other language sources exist. Missvain (talk) 00:05, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:TNT and my standards for houses of worship. The huge amount of work to fix this essay is greater than the apparent lack of notability. Bearian (talk) 17:02, 27 January 2020 (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.