Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Advaita Vedanta Ajativada

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 of the debate was keep. howcheng [ t • c • w • e ] 17:20, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Advaita Vedanta Ajativada

Delete. Original research. —Preost talk contribs 04:12, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

  • Delete as original research. Mo0[talk] 04:20, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete as per the above. Snurks T C 04:21, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. We already have Advaita Vedanta. utcursch | talk 08:53, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Just comments, no vote: We already have Advaita Vedanta. I am not sure of the context of the present article. If possible, I will come back with more comments. --Bhadani 15:53, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
  • COMMENTSThis article's subject matter is not recent, or orginal but hoary with age;( Some thousands of years at least). It is the most complicated but simple example of Vedantic Philosphy, and so deserves explanation in the same terms....--Aoclery 17:26, 15 December 2005 (UTC)Tony O'Clery
  • Keep. I have re-written the article. Please reconsider keeping this article on a concept in Hindu philosophy. — goethean ॐ 21:37, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
    • The re-write is great stub! If this is how it will be, then I'll adjust my vote to keep.—Preost talk contribs 21:51, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Excellent.Now I understand how Wikipedia works. I was treating it as a magazine of some kinds. Sometimes it takes me some time to get to planet earth, as 'believer' in Ajativada....--Aoclery 00:07, 16 December 2005 (UTC)Tony

Hopefully my further editings are now within the guidelines..--Aoclery 17:01, 16 December 2005 (UTC)Tony

Actually, they are not. What you added here is vague, ungrammatical, unencyclopedic, lacks context, and could be a copyright violation, which is a very serious matter. and this: "............Sri Swami Atmananda." is just sort of meaningless and inappropriate. Is this a quotation from Sri Swami Atmananda? If so, what page of what book, article, or interview is it from? You lower the value of the entire Wikipedia project when you carelessly insert text like this. I appreciate that you understand Ajativada in a deeper way than I do, but you really need to be more careful and to read the Wikipedia guidelines if you want your contributions to be respected and retained. Your edits will have to be severely cleaned up. Everything in Wikipedia must be attributed to a source. — goethean ॐ 17:11, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for your advice and editing.........--Aoclery 17:37, 16 December 2005 (UTC)Tony

  • Keep per Goethean--File Éireann 22:03, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep as above. Staffelde 01:06, 17 December 2005 (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.