Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bir Krsna Goswami


 * 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. &mdash; Scientizzle 00:52, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Bir Krsna Goswami

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Non notable individual. Wikipedia is not for advertisements for particular gurus or swamis, it is a resource for notable individuals. Article has no independent third party sources. Does not meet the standards of Reliable sources, notability of people, and Biographies of living persons. Ism schism (talk) 05:18, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions.   —Ism schism (talk) 05:20, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions.   —Ism schism (talk) 05:21, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Non notable individual. Wikipedia is not for advertisements for particular gurus, it is a resource for notable individuals. Article has no independent third party sources. Does not meet the standards of Reliable sources, Biographies of living persons, or notability of people. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 05:24, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete How all ISKCON figures have suddenly become notabale in one day. Salih (talk) 10:19, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - no sources -- Cra del  21:16, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Do not snow Membership in the governing body of Hare Krishna seems to be a plausible notabilty claim. Membership in the College of Cardinals would be. The situation here is somewhat borderline because Hare Krishna is a somewhat smaller religion, although still substantially greater than an isolated congregation. The individual does need a minimum of two independent sources which may possibly include religious sources. I would recommend not WP:SNOWing and giving the authors an opportunity to obtain sources. Best, --Shirahadasha (talk) 21:09, 21 February 2008 (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.