Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Avadhanam


 * 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   keep. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 00:22, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Avadhanam

 * – ( View AfD View log )

It seems to be a copyright vio because, some entire paragraphs have directly from the other source! roh. (talk) 11:00, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Which other source?Curb Chain (talk) 13:00, 23 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Directly Copied the lines from the source http://www.techautos.com/avasc/avasc2.html
 * Please do check References ,See aslo.. regards roh. (talk) 14:58, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 17:56, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 17:57, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions.


 * Keep. While this text is hard to follow in places, and searches are made difficult by the fact that "Avandhanam" is apparently a personal name as well, I was able to find at least one source to confirm the existence of the subject, whicb seems otherwise worthy of an article.  Not seeing the claimed copyright violation either. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 15:38, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. The sole rationale advanced by the proposing editor is an alleged copyvio which she has not successfully demonstrated. Subject appears to be notable. --gråb whåt you cån (talk) 19:56, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MacMedtalk stalk 02:10, 1 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep This is an article that could be said to be poorly written by Western stylistic standards. And I readily concede that it could be improved stylistically and in its content.  However, even with its current faults, this article enabled me to learn a little bit about a robust and intriguing literary tradition that I never before knew existed.  It seems indisputable to me after reading this article and The Hindu reference that this topic is notable.  I hope that an editor who understands the topic better will work to improve the article.  Deletion is not the solution.  The normal editorial process is what is needed here.  Cullen328 (talk) 06:24, 1 July 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.