Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aaiyyanism


 * 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. userfied....  Wifione  Message 06:06, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Aaiyyanism

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Not a notable current organization, nor a notable ancient religious branch. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 14:48, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  —Ism schism (talk) 14:53, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions. Ism schism (talk) 14:54, 1 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment I've added some links and a bibliography. The fact that someone has bothered to set up a website critiquing Aaiyyanism is interesting. I suspect most of the links will be in Hindi etc, not in English. Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:49, 1 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment The definition of what is a notable organisation or religious branch is subjective - there does seem to be lots of links if you google Aaiyyanism (32,300 results). I was brought up an Aaiyyanist Hindu (though I have left now) and know many people who were Aaiyyanists. It is not as widely known as the Hari Krishna movement partly because they are fairly [secretive]. Prominent members and ex-members include [Swami VenPuravi Aadhavan] and the Artist [D. Udaiyan]. Yogaraman (talk) 10:33, 6 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment In reply to Chiswick Chap, Aaiyyanism is a Dravidian Hindu religion - so any critisism would probably be in Tamil/Telegu or one of the Southern Languages of India - though saying that English is one of the official languages of India. Yogaraman (talk) 11:16, 6 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Well, if you can find any reliable sources in any language, please list them here or add them to the article. I had a look in English and had difficulty finding anything usable, but I'm glad to hear you think you can locate some in Tamil, Kannada or whatever. There is no language preference here, and it's not a matter of official languages but actually finding usable sources. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:48, 6 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment Not notable. There are no reliable sources. If this religion is 3000 years old - there would be proof, and lots of it. This article might not be a hoax, but it is indeed non-notable OR - and should thus be deleted. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 01:20, 7 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete No third-party, reliable references. Most google search results are wikipedia mirrors or Aaiyyan World Foundation-related links. Notability and reliability of Aaiyyan World Foundation as well as Siddharthain, D (who wrote the critique) are questionable. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 06:45, 7 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment In reply to my response and others, Aaiyyanism is actually a Dravidian Hindu sect not a seperate religion in itself - so apologies for that confusion. I'll try to add some references now from the books I have at home, but having a quick glance they seem to be written by Aaiyyanists or published by the Aaiyyan World Foundation Press. Maybe a merger with hindu sects or hindu denominations could be considered. Yogaraman (talk) 07:25, 8 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment Ok, i've addded some references. I'm an ex-Aaiyyanist so have got rid of most of the books but still had a few in the attic. There isn't much web information i could find. The only independent book was one written by an ex cult member. Maybe a merger with Hindu Demoninations may be an option. I know we only have a limited time to debate this but i could try to contact some Aaiyyanist relatives and get them to update the wiki or give me some more refs? Yogaraman (talk) 10:25, 8 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment There are No third-party, reliable references. I suggest that Yogaraman work on this on a userfied page until he can find reliable sources. Until then, the page should be deleted. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 16:12, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Rcsprinter  (speak)  20:40, 8 January 2012 (UTC)




 * Comment Yes I agree with Ism schisms last comment. It is reasonable for this page to be deleted for the time being or even merged with Hindu demoninations until I find reliable 3rd party sources. In the meantime I will work on this on a userfied page. Hope that is ok to end the discussion? Yogaraman (talk) 07:55, 9 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment Yogaraman wrote: "In the meantime I will work on this on a userfied page" - Of course I need to be an administrator to do this as I don't have the priveledges to move the page. Maybe Ism schisms can help me and then delete the original entry. Yogaraman (talk) 15:05, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Bryce  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 02:45, 16 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Question: Are there any variations in spelling or translation? What is the Hindi (or other Indic script) to search for? Osiris (talk) 08:59, 16 January 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Osiris (temp) (talk • contribs)
 * No, it is a religious group that is not notable. Aside from there personal website, there are no reliable third party reliable sources. As such, and as the creator of the article has agreed to - the article should be deleted and userfied. Please see the discussion above. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 18:13, 21 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete and userfy as per Ism schism. It is time this was brought to a close. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:23, 21 January 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.