Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hindu Unity 2

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 no consensus. Mailer Diablo 19:28, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hindu_Unity

Website does not meet any of the criteria at Wikipedia:Notability (web). BhaiSaab ^talk 22:46, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete Agreed and seconded.Netaji 23:07, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
• KeepIt's an interesting article. It just needs work and a cool head.--D-Boy 00:56, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment: Are interesting articles excused from notability criteria? BhaiSaab ^talk 01:16, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Per reason given in first AfD. Gizza^{Chat ©} 01:37, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
• KeepThis is an interesting website, is very popular in NRI circles and has all the good prospects for futureMustafa Bhai 02:01, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

• This is your second edit. I am certain you are a sockpuppet but of who? Gizza^{Chat ©} 02:07, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete unless evidence is provided that this meets WP:WEB. --Kinu ^t/_c 05:16, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete: fails WP:WEB. POV to information ratio alarmingly high. {{NRV}} — Kaustuv Chaudhuri 08:02, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Interesting site. Notable enough. -- Karl Meier 14:05, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment: Then please explain how this site meets WP:WEB. --Kinu ^t/_c 17:17, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment: Karl is just here to vote for the opposite of my opinion. BhaiSaab ^talk 18:15, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment: BhaiSaab: Please avoid making such personal remarks, and false accusations against me. -- Karl Meier 19:52, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment: lol it's not a personal remark. Can you substantiate your claim that this website is "notable enough"? BhaiSaab ^talk 19:59, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete non-notable website. --musicpvm 21:56, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per norm 24.211.193.113 02:27, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
• Weak Keep pending rewrite. I voted delete the last time this was up. However, recent events in India in which this site was blocked officially for hate speech were covered in national newspapers, which increases notability, and in my opinion causes it to meet WP:WEB. However, the article as it stands is dreadfully pov. Would be wonderful if someone reading this would clean it up. Id do it myself, but Im a sensitive soul and have got more than my share of invective from people with a certain brand of politics recently. Hornplease 06:26, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - per statements of Karl Meier and others above. Orangehead 16:15, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep and Merge Firstly WP:WEB is a Guideline not a policy. Secondly, it states a website is notable if the content itself has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the site itself. How about the many news media who have covered the fact that the website has been banned? They are all non-trivial works, as indeed is the Indian government which cited it. Having said that the guideline also said the website should be included in the artcle about its parent organisation, hence I suggest it is merged with Bajrang Dal. --AndrewRT 21:43, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - notable group.Blnguyen | rant-line 06:17, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
• KeepThis article just need clean up.Other wise a good article.Yousaf465

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.