Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Urmila Devi Dasi
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 keep.--Kubigula (talk) 03:22, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Urmila Devi Dasi
This personal bio is not supported by links to verifiable sources. MBest-son (talk) 22:30, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
- KeepI say that it should be here. Why? Because articles like this make me happy. Look at it- cited sources, a picture, everything! No external sources. But I still think it should be kept. David G Brault (talk) 23:45, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
- Strong Keep Clearly a notable ISKCON leader. Also, she is a contributor to ISKCON Communications Journal. Ism schism (talk) 17:35, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
- The journal's website states that, "Urmila Devi Dasi (Edith E. Best) joined ISKCON in 1973 in Chicago. Her primary work has been in the area of education. In 1982-83 in Detroit, Michigan, she and her husband started an ISKCON primary school, which gradually grew to include secondary students, where she served as Principal for eight years. She went on to found another primary and secondary school in North Carolina in 1990, where she continues to be the Principal. Urmila devi dasi has compiled Vaikuntha Children, a guidebook for education in ISKCON and is currently writing and coordinating the development of a Krsna conscious academic curriculum for primary and secondary students. She has for many years written on the education column for ISKCON's Back to Godhead magazine, where she is also associate editor." ISKCON Communications Journal Contributors Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 17:35, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
- Note She is an initiating guru in a predominantly male dominated society. This is notable, and more references should be provided to support this alleged fact. Wikidās ॐ 11:59, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
- Reply - I can not see a need to distinguish the two - initiating guru who had disciples or one who is approved but does not have any. There was ones a guru of ISKCON named Sridhara Swami, (notable individual btw). He at one point lost all his disciples, as was guru without any (for a short while). That does not make one not guru. I think five year old approval is an indication of notablity, the biggest problem is reliable sources that prove the notability. Wikidās ॐ 08:15, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
- Note She is currently only a potential guru. If you follow the link you will find that while she was nominated, she is not one yet. She is still in a state of possibly she will become one, possibly she will not. David G Brault (talk) 03:04, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
- Keep. Initiating gurus are the top people in ISKCON, so clearly notable. And I don't see any problem with verification here. Who better than ISKCON to tell us who their initiating gurus are? Independent sources are only needed for contentious statements. Phil Bridger (talk) 13:55, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
- Delete This article needs more reliable third-party published sources. The ICJ/VNN source material is not good enough to keep with WP:NOTE standards (especially for a five-years-ago nominated potential ISKCON guru). Either this article should be better sourced in supporting her notability (preferably independant sources, but from ICJ/VNN is ok, considering this is regarding internal ISKCON leadership) or deleted. RustDragon (talk) 07:12, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
-
- Comment Three such references have been added to the article. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 12:15, 6 May 2008 (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.
