Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sudhakara Chaturvedi

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. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 05:54, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sudhakara Chaturvedi

Looks to me like an advertisement for a service, and very incoherent at that. Bp28 10:43, 3 August 2006 (UTC)Wow! Article has been MAJORLY cleaned up, actually makes sense now, and definitely seems notable enough -- scholar born in 1897 with direct ties to Mahatma Gandhi. I'd like to withdraw my AfD nomination if possible, or at the very least my vote. This seemed incredibly like some sort of odd advertisement before (including even a contact address!), but is completely different in its current state, and I no longer feel it should be deleted. Bp28 19:49, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

• Delete as above, it even includes a contact address! I get 6 unique Google hits, and those mostly appear to be someone else with the same name. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 11:12, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete unless expanded and sourced. If he genuinely is a direct disciple of Swamy Shraddhanand then he may have some notability.

Weak Keep the rewrite. Expand the notability claim? Dlyons493 Talk 12:21, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

• Delete as per nom. --Larry V (talk | contribs) 14:59, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
• Weak keep, but requires major cleanup. The article title uses a nonstandard romanisation of his name. Suggest move to Sudhakar Chaturvedi. The Hindu, one of India's largest newspapers, has a brief bio of him[1]. Googling for this spelling gives some 45K 47 hits[2], and I am sure there are minor variations of his spelling. More and better sources can be found easily, I would imagine. — Kaustuv Chaudhuri 15:18, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Article looks very nice now (I didn't read the original version). Vedic scholars who were friends with Gandhi and have lived to be 109 years old deserve an article, assuming they have verifiable references, as this fellow does. -- technopilgrim 18:48, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep as rewritten. Makes sourced claims to notability. Eluchil404 21:29, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep rewrite looks good.  ALKIVAR™ 02:21, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
• keep please rewrite looks nice now and has sources Yuckfoo 04:53, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, notable and verifiable. --Myles Long 16:46, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

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.