Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Akshunnanath Mahaprabhu


 * 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. JohnCD (talk) 13:56, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Akshunnanath Mahaprabhu

 * – ( View AfD View log )

I can find no evidence this person meets our criteria at WP:BIO. The external links don't mention him, the 2 inline citations are about a lineage. Neither name shows up in Google News, and the only book seems to be a Wikipedia clone. Dougweller (talk) 12:19, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:29, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:30, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete, weakly, per nomination. The article describes him as a master of many different esoteric traditions of which he holds the main seat of some: for instance he is the present holder of Trika Saasanam Rajgaddi of Trika Saasanam Rajdarbar where He was given abhisekh and name Sri Guptapadacharya Trisamvidraj Muni by Srikanthanath Muni.  This sounds like a claim of notability, but lacks context and is difficult to evaluate.  Transliteration issues may stymie searches in the Latin alphabet.  Sources, if there are any, are unlikely to be in English. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 16:43, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. I can't find any mention of this person under any of the names or titles mentioned in the article in anything other than Wikipedia mirrors, at least not in English.  If there are sources in other languages that someone can cite, I'd be willing to reconsider, but based on the comment that an anon IP posted at WP:RSN, which precipitated this AFD, I'm inclined to think that, assuming good faith on the part of that poster and of the various editors who built this article, that the subject of this article is/was a real person and not an outright hoax, but is not notable per Wikipedia standards. Fladrif (talk) 19:16, 23 February 2011 (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.