Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Hinduism

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
See also: Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Religion
Shortcuts
Deletion Sorting
Project

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Hinduism. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
  1. Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
  2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Hinduism|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
Removing a closed AfD discussion
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Hinduism. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.


Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:
Purge page cache watch


Hinduism

[edit]

Vitthal Ramji Shinde

[edit]
Vitthal Ramji Shinde (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Promotional. The references don't add to the notability Gauravs 51 (talk) 06:43, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Swamini Brahmaprajnananda Saraswati

[edit]
Swamini Brahmaprajnananda Saraswati (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The subject of this BLP does not meet WP:NBIO, WP:NAUTHOR, nor the WP:GNG. The article was drafted by someone who has a suspect COI but the author has been banned for sockpuppetry, notably for removing maintenance tags. An IP user on my talk page has acknowledged that there isn't even very much published information on the subject. Combined with my BEFORE, I'm not seeing anything that meets our notability requirements for this article that appears to be masquerading as an advertisement. Bobby Cohn (talk) 23:39, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I’d like to add my voice in favor of keeping Swamini Brahmaprajnananda Saraswati’s page. Her influence spans across continents, and her teachings on Vedanta have touched the lives of so many people, myself included. While the page might need some edits (and we are working on that), the information is valuable and represents someone who is genuinely notable in the spiritual community. A lot of us are actively contributing to improve the page to meet Wikipedia’s standards, and removing it now would erase a key resource that many find helpful in discovering a true Vedanta guru. I hope this article can be preserved and refined, not deleted. [added this earlier in the talk section] 212.138.196.2 (talk) 16:53, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This person is notable for her scholarly research in the field of psychology. She is at the forefront identifying similarities/dissimilarities between Western psychology and psychological principles and psychology inherent in classic Indian texts such as the Bhagavad Gita. Her soon to be published PhD dissertation addresses this topic in a unique way. A similar person who does have a Wikipedia page is Professor Rambachan. It is important for Wikipedia to present balanced opinions on major topics such as psychology.Leaving her page in place will allow for contrasting views and opinions from the dominant existing framework.Eoddleifson (talk) 14:38, 9 October 2024 (UTC) — Eoddleifson (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
I respectfully oppose the deletion of this page for the following reasons:
Notability: Swamini Brahmaprajnananda Saraswati holds a significant position in the spiritual community and has made contributions that are noteworthy within her field. She is a respected figure in the Parampara, and her work, including published writings and teachings, is relevant to a wide audience. Her influence goes beyond individual students and impacts the larger community of spiritual seekers in India and internationally.
Presence of Reliable Sources: While the page may need further citations, there are multiple reliable sources that can validate her notability. These sources include books, publications, and notable mentions in relevant forums. Her contributions to spiritual teachings and involvement in community services have been acknowledged in respected publications. We will continue improving the citations to comply with Wikipedia's verifiability and notability guidelines.
As an example, her work can be seen in comparison with other Swamis and Swaminis in the Parampara who have established Wikipedia pages (e.g., Swamini Atmaprajnananda Saraswati).
Additionally, published materials such as her books and teachings, and references to her in newspapers and online platforms, validate her presence and importance in the field of spiritual education.
Ongoing Efforts to Improve the Page: The page has already been edited to align with Wikipedia's guidelines, including improvements made to ensure neutrality and adherence to notability criteria. We are open to further editing to meet any specific concerns raised by editors. This includes adding more reliable secondary sources and ensuring that the content follows a neutral point of view.
I request that this page be given more time for improvements and not be deleted hastily. I believe that with the support of the community, we can ensure that this page meets Wikipedia’s standards. 50.245.102.135 (talk) 20:10, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Arguments actually based in policy would be quite helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seraphimblade Talk to me 03:10, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear, strongly vote to keep the page. On the notability criterion
a. She has additions to research on psychology and Vedanta. Her papers are are published in various offline and online journals. Link - https://www.academia.edu/38993865
b. Her authored and published book on Vedanta has helped multiple students/seekers with raving reviews. Book link - https://amzn.in/d/5V1rdGC
c. She recently was honoured with a doctorate degree (PhD) and her study research thesis is up for publication into a book.
d. She was recently invited by Rick Archer as well for a freewheeling conversation at the acclaimed BATGAP podcast where only select spirituality awakened people are invited. Link - https://youtube.com/watch?v=pgVMzyIpVfQ
Strongly advise to keep the page for many people who benefit from her works. 2.48.241.175 (talk) 06:15, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: I don't find anything in Gscholar, this person doesn't pass academic notability. There are some mentions in GBooks by they talk about the teachings than about the individual... The only green source per Source Highlighter is 16 in the Hindu. Beyond that, there isn't much left for sourcing in RS. Oaktree b (talk) 15:19, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hindu University of America

[edit]
AfDs for this article:
Hindu University of America (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This institution is unaccredited, and SCHOOLOUTCOMES#2 cannot apply. Thus, it needs to pass the stringent WP:NORG, which it does not — there is no significant coverage of the subject in multiple reliable secondary sources independent of the subject. TrangaBellam (talk) 21:05, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Hinduism, India, United States of America, and Florida. TrangaBellam (talk) 21:07, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:15, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Per nomination. Doesn't meet notability, fails WP:SIGCOV. Ratekreel (talk) 23:21, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Page does not satisfy the notability guidelines for organization. Poor sources on the page with no significant coverage. Fails WP:NSCHOOL. RangersRus (talk) 11:40, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I've expanded the article by adding several references, including to a fairly in-depth profile in the Orlando Sentinel, and to a book by a sociologist who describes the emergence of the university and calls it a "milestone". Notability is arguably established, and even if it isn't, more references with nontrivial material can be found. One of the primary purposes of notability guidelines is to ensure that there is sufficient material to create an informative article, and there is clearly enough published material on this university (even though one might wish for more so that an even meatier article would be possible). For further expansion, there just needs to be effort put in to tap that material and integrate it into the article. --Presearch (talk) 23:19, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Have you noted that this "fairly in-depth profile" has no author? So, no — an advertorial (churnalism) in a local newspaper does NOT add toward notability.
    Notability is arguably established, and even if it isn't, more references with nontrivial material can be found This article is at AfD because I (and others) believe that notability is not established and I am happy to see you accept that. Regrettably, we cannot speculate about sourcing esp. that we are discussing an organization in USA and not, say, Sudan! Further, WP:NEXIST cautions, However, once an article's notability has been challenged, merely asserting that unspecified sources exist is seldom persuasive, especially if time passes and actual proof does not surface.
    It's not my case that no sources exist — 1 and 2 from among the very few hits in Newspapers.com — but that they are trivial and/or they are routine run-of-the-mill coverage. TrangaBellam (talk) 07:23, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I've added several more sources, all with named authors, and arguably all from reliable sources. All of these provide "more than a trivial mention," and in some cases the university was indeed "the main topic of the source material", so each of these arguably contributes "significant coverage" for meeting general notability (WP:GNG)
    Regarding the Orlando Sentinel article, that may now be moot, but it's worth noting that the newspaper is reputable, and the userfied (non-Wikipedia) essay on "churnalism" acknowledges that "If a reliable source decides to fact check a press release and write a story about it, it then meets the definition of coming from a reliable source" - that raises the question of whether an absence of named author is enough grounds to treat this article as unreliable when it's from an otherwise reputable source (have you found any duplicate versions of the same material on numerous sites?). (By the way, friend, I suspect you know that a statement that something "is arguably established" is different than stating that it is "not established") --Presearch (talk) 01:14, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    "News India Times" is not even a RS in all probabilities. And, a couple of articles in India Abroad — a now-defunct publication aimed exclusively at the Indian diaspora with a peak circulation of ~ thirty thousand — do not make the entity wiki-notable; if anything, such meager coverage in such a niche publication only goes to demonstrate the non-notability.
    Further, NCORP has a higher standard for sources to contribute toward notability. This is due to the levels of (undisclosed; see WP:TOI) paid-coverage frequently engaged in by business entities. So, we look for sources that do not mechanically reproduce what the organization says and show some critical engagement. TrangaBellam (talk) 05:42, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Leaning keep. I get 290 hits on Newspapers.com, including the fairly substantial Mark I. Pinsky, "School of Thought: Hindu University begins journey in teaching... with a degree of karma", The Hilton Head Island Packet (July 3, 2004), p. 1-C, 3-C, and Amy Limbert, "Kuldip Gupta, 66, helped found, lead Hindu University of America", The Orlando Sentinel (February 9, 2007), p. B6. Also, "Hinduism: Studying the ancients", The Atlanta Constitution (September 28, 1996), p. G4; "Beavercreek: Online Hindu classes", Dayton Daily News (January 9, 2021), p. B3. BD2412 T 01:46, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 11:49, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 05:29, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Categories

[edit]

Templates

[edit]

Miscellaneous

[edit]

Hinduism Proposed deletions (WP:PROD)

[edit]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Hinduism&oldid=1249875695"