Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shree Datta Maharaj Kavishwar

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 was Delete for lack of compliance with WP:V. Nobody seems to formulate a solid opinion as to whether verification could somehow be obtained, so if it ever is, this AfD should not be used as a basis for a G4 deletion. - CrazyRussian talk/email 12:03, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Shree Datta Maharaj Kavishwar

Unsourced, and "0" google hits. possible hoax. Delete. Stubbleboy 22:00, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

  • What kind of source is needed? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 192.240.14.11 (talk • contribs) .
  • Keep - notable for Shaktipat.Bakaman Bakatalk 01:19, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletions. Bakaman Bakatalk 01:21, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Weak Keep Very weak nomination. Google hits are not always the norm, the person in question will not have many ghits since he may not be known outside of Pune circles and also he lived during a time when the web was not there. If anyone can give any newspaper articles or books as references, the i'll change my vote to strong keep. --Ageo020 (talk • contribs • count) 02:12, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
    • Actually, it's a good nomination. The nominator noted that the article had no sources, tried to find some for xyrself, and came up empty handed. No sources cited, and no sources to be found, is a good argument that an article is unverifiable, which is one of the primary reasons that we delete things, per our Wikipedia:Deletion policy. You haven't cited any sources, and you thus haven't countered the charge that this article is unverifiable. Please cite sources if you want to make an argument to keep that holds water. Uncle G 09:00, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Weak keap Comment: I tried alternate spelling and found this. The page 61 cites him as written a book, "Shri Gurudevcharitra". May be if someone can get hold of the book, will have more information on him. It reads, "This brief biographical sketch of ...Shri Vasudevanand Saraswati...Swami Maharaj has been primarily and extensively sourced from the Marathi Biography of Shri Swami Maharaj "Shri Gurudevcharitra" by Param Pujya Brahmarshi Shri Datta Maharaj Kavishvar. We have the utmost happiness and heartfelt gratitude in acknowledging his debt." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ganeshk (talk • contribs) 2006-10-04 03:11:10
    • That this person has written a biography of someone else only helps as far as having an encyclopaedia article on that other person is concerned. To support this article, we need a biography of this person. See our Wikipedia:Criteria for inclusion of biographies. Uncle G 09:00, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
Uncle G, I went through the criteria and found this article ineligible. I change my vote to a neutral comment until some one can find a better reference. - Ganeshk (talk) 06:53, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
  • It's no use Uncle G. The nomination has already been advertised, so the consensus we reach wont be from the community as a whole. Stubbleboy 01:46, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
Stubbleboy, WikiProject Deletion sorting is a accepted guideline. The merits and de-merits of de-centralizing deletion should be discussed elsewhere. - Ganeshk (talk) 06:53, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Thanks for pointing that out! May I also remind you Ganeshk that afd is not a vote. Apparently you must be confused about this as evidence here and in your comments above to Uncle G. Thanks! Stubbleboy 11:53, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
 AFD relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
 Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, MER-C 10:23, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete - unverifiable. I can't find any sources to confirm any of the details (although I accept that Google will not be the best source for searching for information in this case), he is not mentioned in any of the connecting articles, and the creator has not provided any references. Yomanganitalk 12:35, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete -- Unless sufficient sources can be provided (and if he's "considered by many to be the great guru..." it shouldn't be this difficult to find some), then the article's got to go. SkerHawx 03:18, 16 October 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.