Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bhagavad Gita As It Is

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep as rewritten. (Some early votes discounted when it appeared that they had not returned to the article after the rewrite.) Rossami (talk) 08:33, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Bhagavad Gita As It Is

Seems like half book advertisement/vanity, half overlap with material in Bhagavad Gita. Delete, or merge if there's anything noteworthy in the second half. Good show, Andries, now that there's a better article and a clearer picture of the issue, I'm changing to Keep --InShaneee 17:25, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

• Keep the article was very biased but this translation of the Gita is famous and is the best sold. German Wikipedia also has an article about this translation. I removed the bias. Andries 17:17, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Good work, Andries. Antandrus 17:45, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Delete this extremely POV article about a non-notable translation which at most would be a footnote in the Bhagavad Gita article. RickK 22:19, Feb 25, 2005 (UTC)

• RickK, This is the ISKCON/Hare Krishna version of the Bhagavad Gita which is noteable because it is the one that has been most sold outside India. Scholars probably do not have a high regard of this version. Andries 20:50, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

• Merge and Redirect. --BD2412 23:19, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, just under the bar of notability, POV promo. Megan1967 00:49, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, concur with Rick. Radiant! 09:37, Feb 26, 2005 (UTC)
• I would recommend Merge and Redirect to International Society for Krishna Consciousness. I don't recommend merge or redirect to Bhagavad Gita. Having read this book and also the Bhagavad Gita in a couple of different translations, this is really more a commentary than a translation, and it's focused on a single author's viewpoint. On the other hand, there was a time when you couldn't get through any major world airport without the orange-clad members of ISKCON trying to sell you a copy, so maybe it does deserve its own article. DialUp 23:33, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Agree with DialUp that this would be better as a redirect to ISCKON than to Bhagavad Gita. This translation is closely identifed with that group and has little regard except as an artifact of that group. older≠wiser 03:10, Feb 27, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. The article could be improved and needs to be more NPOV, but this is a notable work, and is not the same as the Bhagavad Gita. Jonathunder 22:05, 2005 Feb 27 (UTC)
• Keep as rewritten by Andries; no longer a promo or POV piece. Notable translation of a sacred book in Hinduism; note that we already have a precedent set for allowing articles on different translations of the Bible (e.g. The Living Bible, American Standard Version, Contemporary English Version, etc.); the same may apply to sacred books in other religions. What distinguishes this translation of the Gita is its wide distribution, the elaborate "purport" given for each verse, and its use by ISKCON. (IMHO, there are much better renderings into English of this marvelous work). Oh, and for those who like the Google notability standard, 25,600 hits on "bhagavad gita as it is". Antandrus 17:45, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.