Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bhagavan Antle
- 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. Article does not evidence notability via sources to meet WP:GNG joe deckertalk to me 16:23, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
- Bhagavan Antle (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
- Delete The article Bhagavan Antle should be deleted for lack of notability. The article only has two references, and the references are not specific for Bhagavan Antle. I could not find any references to Bhagavan Antle in any mainstream media websites, or in any other Wikipedia sites. Wikipedia's notability guidelines are as follows: A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has been the subject of multiple published secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject. If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources may not be sufficient to establish notability. Primary sources may be used to support content in an article, but they do not contribute toward proving the notability of a subject. I don't believe that Bhagavan Antle meets this notability requirement. Debbie W. 03:25, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
- Comment I've taken out an unsourced section from the article which seemed potentially libellous. There are references here and there on the Internet to him, relating to the care (or otherwise) of animals. asnac (talk) 08:32, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:04, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:51, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BusterD (talk) 12:14, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
- Delete non-notable biography. Stormbay (talk) 01:08, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Final relist. The vote above is a WP:JNN !vote, which is something to be avoided.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Bmusician 05:04, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
- Comment Point well taken on my WP:JNN opinion above. I support the delete posted by citing the lack of reliable references. There is a certain amount of passing interest coverage which, to my mind, does not reach the requisite level of importance/notability. I would like my opinion to be given due consideration in light of these additional comments. Stormbay (talk) 22:51, 28 April 2012 (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.