Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Avatar Meher Baba Trust


 * 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 and redirect to Meher Baba. Consensus that, despite the notability of the parent topic, there is insufficient evidence as to the notability of this fund. Notability is not inherited from a notable parent topic, and there appears to be insufficient coverage of the fund specifically. ~ mazca  talk 01:14, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Avatar Meher Baba Trust

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Completely non-notable fund. It is hard, at first glance, to see how such a financial instrument could meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines, as, by their nature, they tend towards the micro and the confidential. This fund has made insufficient impact culturally in its own right to have garnered the necessary in-depth or persistence of coverage in reliable sources to warrant inclusion. Regardless of the creator—and the wishes of the creator—this has no impact on WP:ORGSIG or WP:INHERITORG. The topic has received minimal coverage, except for trivial mentions, generally. It has received even less (by a massive margin) in the far more stringent news reportage. Suffice, then of course to say, that the literature (with the exception of dedications, listed mentions, and WP:SPS) is equally sparse. Ultimately, there in insufficient coverage for the Trust to pass the very basic requirements of WP:ORGCRIT. —SerialNumber54129 paranoia / cheap shit room 11:30, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions.  ~ Winged Blades Godric  11:38, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  ~ Winged Blades Godric  11:38, 8 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete--What the nom said.I fail to find any non-trivial coverage in Indian newspapers.And, call me skeptical but I'm beginning to smell a walled garden around Meher Baba....... It seems that having talk-page-stalkers always comes with it's perks:) And, I need to learn to write the art of writing of such nomination statements.....   ~ Winged Blades Godric  11:42, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep, a notable trust and seemingly a deletion attempt which is a part of an attempt by editors to remove many of the Baba pages from Wikipedia's very good collection of articles on the subject. As with the many other pages put under deletion threat in a swoop (and I'm not going to look for them all, but an attempt like this should result in all of the noms being removed because of clearly-communicated bias) I am sad to have to "defend" myself from labels and explain that I am not a member of a Baba cult, or any related organization, nor do I know anyone who is a member, but am a concerned editor who has happened to find this many-page attempt to purge Wikipedia of Baba related articles, something I haven't seen to this extent before. Randy Kryn (talk) 15:20, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
 * a perusal of WP:ASPERSIONS may be of profit; and WP:ILIKEIT too perhaps. My nomination is part of no crusade; if you think so, you will file at AN/I, or you will strike that portion of your comment. Thank you, —SerialNumber54129  paranoia / cheap shit room 15:35, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
 * My apologies to you personally, and my bad. I found this page after finding what is certainly a topic-purge attempt by another editor who has nominated probably a dozen or more related Baba pages as well as using language which clearly shows bias against the topic, and it was to that editor that my comments apply. Randy Kryn (talk) 15:44, 9 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom and fails WP:ORGSIG and WP:ORGDEPTH. GSS (talk |c|em ) 13:30, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom Galobtter (pingó mió) 14:35, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep Delete Fails the familiarity test. Delete it and other foreign nonprofit charitable organizations. Let's keep the American Wikipedia for America. Here are some other ones we could get rid of next: Category:Charities based in India. Changing my vote to keep, per the comments by Randy Kryn and Hoverfish below. Dazedbythebell (talk) 12:12, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Am I correct to think that your 'delete' reasoning is satire? This is of course not the American Wikipedia but the English Wikipedia, and India is it's second biggest user (the English Wikipedia is the main Wikipedia for India). Randy Kryn (talk) 16:22, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Considering this, obviously satire. But considering 3 out of 4 delete !voters are Indian, you're apparent accusation of Americans/Westerners deleting things they don't know about it seems unlikely, and deletion due to the policy based rationale given by Serial seems more likely, doesn't it? Galobtter (pingó mió) 16:30, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Actually, user Dazedbythebell is being neutral in his ivotes on this vast field of deletion requests aimed at "nuking" Wikipedia's Meher Baba collection, and has made reasoned 'delete' ivotes among them. I just thought this one should be clarified, as a closer may take it as a real 'delete' ivote and not satire (and I'm really not sure which one it is). Randy Kryn (talk) 16:34, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Hmm, interesting. This one seems clearly satire though Galobtter (pingó mió) 16:41, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
 * No my delete vote is not sarcasm, though my comment about deleting other Indian charities is. The fact is that I do not know how to find secondary sources to establish its notability for Wikipedia. So I am voting for deletion due to that. The reality is that it is a real Trust, and has a free school, free dispensary, free veterinary clinic for local farmers, free cataract clinic for the locals of the Ahmednagar area. But that is no substitute for independent sources. So by Wikipedia's criteria it really should be deleted, at least until someone more knowledgeable about sources can rewrite it at a later time. So my deletion vote is sincere. Dazedbythebell (talk) 19:25, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
 * May I add a counter point here (without voting "keep"): This article is about the only central organization established by Meher Baba, the aims of which are limited to what the article says they are. So since we keep getting these notions that "here we have a cult" and that a Baba folloer might be in COI, ie paid by some organization to edit here, it is the ONLY article that makes it clear what this is organization is and what relation it has or doesn't have with Meher Baba's followers. They manage the pilgrimage site and all historical records, but they don't fund or sanction or have any responsibility for any groups of followers. So actually this information IS useful to the readers if they care to know how this "new religious works" in terms of central organization. Hoverfish Talk 22:16, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
 * And, I did find a valid outside-the-group source (next point below) which I've added to the article. This source backs up quite a lot of information on the page, including that it exists and it owns and cares for Meher Baba's last home. This should be enough to assure the pages validity as an important page in Wikipedia's Baba collection. Randy Kryn (talk) 00:40, 14 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Source added to the article from the Asian Tribune of 5 July 2017. This source shows that the Trust is real, and not made up. That it exists and is prominent. And that it owns and cares for the last home that Meher Baba lived in. Randy Kryn (talk) 21:02, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment The Trust and a tiny description of what it does is mentioned in the Meher Baba article, both in the lead and under Legacy. So perhaps a redirect is appropriate. Not sure. The loss of this article will be a loss for Wikipedia, for as Hoverfish mentioned, this is THE Meher Baba organization in the world. However, as I said, I'm not aware of how to find sufficient third party sources (beside the one Kryn found) toat would satisfy a deletionist with a strong sense of personal mission. Dazedbythebell (talk) 12:00, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep per my above argument that this article helps the reader learn about the only existing Meher Baba organization and knowledge about it answers enquiries about what may be behind Baba followers, as well as to whether COI can apply here. Removing this information from Wikipedia simply leaves space for wild speculations. Given time, more RS may come to existence or simply detected. Remember please that RS are not limited to online material and we have limited access to what may well exist in print whether in India or elsewhere. Hoverfish Talk 14:33, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26  (spin me / revolutions) 20:53, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Meher Baba, where this is already discussed (in §Legacy). There's no independent notability to this trust at all; it is, literally, a legacy of Meher Baba. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 21:41, 16 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom and per WP:NOTINHERITED. Despite associations with a notable figure, the trust is not verifiably notable. No amount of kicking up dust will change that. Cesde v a  (talk) 22:40, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete: does not meet WP:NORG; notability is not inherited. No point in a redirect, as it would not be a suitable search term. Nothing to preserve here. K.e.coffman (talk) 02:18, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete, per nom and per WP:NOTINHERITED; just not notable for stand alone article. Kierzek (talk) 12:49, 23 May 2018 (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.