Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anupapaduka


 * 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. Doczilla @SUPERHEROLOGIST 07:21, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Anupapaduka

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

The article has been unsourced since 2009 (the single book by Charles Leadbeater with no page number given is clearly not a reliable source for Wikipedia). The creator of this article Dchmelik has created a lot of unreliable articles which are all stubs or unsourced related to Theosophy and there is a discussion about this at WP:FTN regarding their edits. Dchmelik has now redirected Anupadaka into Anupapadaka. If you look these terms up they do not mean "a philosophical term about reality such as the 'anupadaka plane' or gods or Dhyani-Buddhas that fit the definition" so this is very bad original research. I looked up the word "Anupapadaka", it is used in Theosophical literature to mean birth by metamorphosis or birth without parents, i.e. "parentless" and only that part of the article is correct. There is no mention of an "anupadaka plane", or anything else that Dchmelik has written so this is original research and against policy. I am not sure why we would need an entire article dedicated to this one word which was used by Helena Blavatsky and her followers. I believe it would be best to delete this article. Psychologist Guy (talk) 21:58, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Spirituality-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:06, 15 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep or merge to Plane_(esotericism). You're entirely wrong (other than original translator made typographical error (typo) and I did, so moved to correct) and it's in Pure Land.  Apparently I originally wrote it in more general term and not plane, but in '0s a 'WP:patroller' read my reference and said it's about Anupadaka Plane... charts/diagrams/graphs don't always say 'plane' after long words, just at top or side description, nevertheless at the time I moved citation to 'plane'... of course you never actually read the talk page to see what that person said (nor source).  Citations don't necessarily require page numbers but I can probably get (such tertiary authors are cited/quoted/referenced in numerous articles and many others state same).  I could possibly concede that seven planes theory four higher/spiritual don't need their own articles but am inclusionist.  '(Un)sourced' aren't verbs standardly with that definition (but neologisms or private language) which correct terms include 'cite/credit/quote/reference' (some shorter so can save time).


 * Speedily delete old typos Anupadaka & Anupapadaka (redirects) (but if source material's 100 to 140+ year typo is currently redirected unfortunately people will still expect, as happened with translation of sine (wave) from older language then standardized wrong)--dchmelik☀️🕉︎☉🦉🐝🐍☤☆(talk 05:40, 16 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete Per nom. The page creator has now moved the page twice in two days, so as he says above, the redirects at Anupadaka & Anupapadaka should also be deleted. There is no encylopaedic content on these pages. There are already pages on Theosophy that would be the home for this information if there were anything to say about it. The fact that no one has expanded this article in 13 years does suggest that it is at best a footnote to the larger articles on Theosophy. There is also a problem with the way this and some related articles do not seem to have sufficient focus. Whilst born out of reading on theosophy, they claim relevance to other religions and religious traditions. Information is not notable for any of these, and apparently not for theosophy either. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 07:31, 16 August 2022 (UTC)


 * 'Plane (esoterism)' actually already mostly is a Theosophy article in sense of where most planes ideas came from (having copied seven plane theory from Hinduism to the world and became standard 'New Age', etc., theory) so is most relevant article it could be transferred to whether heading or footnote. Hinduism article cites Theosophy is a Hindu reform movement, so I think is relevant for those (unsure about the other).--dchmelik☀️🕉︎☉🦉🐝🐍☤☆(talk 07:59, 16 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Buddhism and Hinduism. –LaundryPizza03 ( d  c̄ ) 08:13, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete for the reasons argued in the nomination and by ; much like the case with Adi (metaphysical plane), there doesn't seem to be an encyclopedia topic here. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 14:59, 16 August 2022 (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.