Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brhmoism


 * 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.  Blnguyen  ( bananabucket ) 00:26, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Brhmoism

 * – (View AfD)

A google search produces a single result - a trivial mention in a reliable source. Consequently, delete because of notability concerns - lack of significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject. PhilKnight (talk) 13:43, 26 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete Unsourced religion that claims it has "universal appeal' and hardly any followers.  If fact, that latter claim by the article clearly indicates lack of noatability. Edward321 (talk) 14:37, 26 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Brahman which is probably what the editor is referring to. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 17:21, 27 July 2008 (UTC)


 * No. It is something new... ChiragPatnaik (talk) 20:59, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Alansun Reply to above On site -That is not a pamplet but the 31 page registered/copyright Hindi book Brhmaand Pujan.which is offered 'free' for world welfare or knowledge hungry readers.The intention is to share knowledge to the seeker absoletly 'free of cost'.. Could some one of you help in translating them and refer here what exactly this educational book meant?--Dralansun (talk) 10:24, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - the overall smell of this is that it's a promotion for a self-published pamphlet (see http://brhmaandpujanbook.tripod.com). However, I've asked at Wikipedia talk:Noticeboard for India-related topics if someone who reads Hindi could glance at the news reviews. Gordonofcartoon (talk) 19:27, 27 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete Not only is the article poorly written, it's likely the page creator added it (along with Esai and Esa Masi) simply to advertise the aforementioned pamphlet. The link for the pamphlet is posted multiple times on the author's talk page. Beemer 69   chitchat  19:49, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Alan Sun Reply to above Yes I agree the article is poorly written and lack sense of grammar or might appear as some lay writer's work. but the content/material/intention/purpose stay crucial and may be accepted wikipedia/arbitrory judges as they are far matured/judgemental entity and not aspiring/under trained editors.Regards. --Dralansun (talk) 10:24, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Outside comment
 * I was about to log off when I saw the post on the Indian notice board. It's a bit too hazy to read some of them clearly, but yes, something about Brhhmand pujan is mentioned. (The spelling can be transliterated in many ways as the alphabet is a conjunct. It does speak of an "author/writer" Naresh Sonee. I'm not sure about how credible these papers are, cause I've rarely seen some on them on the new stands in Mumbai. However one of them is published in the Dainik Bhaskar which is a reputed publisher. (Its the one that has 25th June 2003 circled & a mega monsoon ad on the right) See this too: .  =Nichalp   «Talk»=  19:57, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Alan Sun reply to aboveArbitrory of wikipedia will be more interested to know which news paper had said what in their news or reviews coverage? Reputation or validity of the newspapers is secondary all indians know about them that they are authentic and most popualr newspapers but here the content of news/reviews[references/notability] are more important than praising how popular the news papers are. Yes they are reputed reliable newspapers and they dont entertain false hoax news/reviews. Regards --Dralansun (talk) 10:24, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

(UTC)
 * Delete Concur with PhilKnight & Gordonofcartoon. Even though I can spot three relatively noteable (noteable, not credible) newspapers on that page being refered. Punjab Kesari, Rajasthan Patrika & Dainik Bhaskar. Hindi Language Newspaper tend to be sensationalist (yes, I'm generalising, there are several respected newspapers as well. and Rajasthan Patrika and Dainik Bhaskar from their larger centers are quite respected) and will sometimes carry stories that are quite frankly unbelievable. Imagine "woman gives birth to martians" etc. The Govt. of India mention is nothing but a copyright on process of the Puja (Puja is a ritual/ceremony) on the book, so that in itself does not provide noteability. The mention to Esa and Esai is irrelvant. They are words used for Jesus and Christians n large parts of the India, which again means nothing. In any case, if the English press and the quality Hindi publications from large publishing centers have not touched it, means that it is bunkum. ChiragPatnaik (talk) 20:59, 27 July 2008
 * BTW we will get a lot of such people on Wikipedia soon, now that it is apparent that wikipedia is a hugely trusted source as far as google is concerned. Wait till the hordes of Search Engine Optimisers start turning up here to write articles... :( ChiragPatnaik (talk) 20:59, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Alan Sun reply to above Dear Chirag I regret for your lack of  knowledge. But then too I respect you. However pls note: prayers / rituals could never be registered by any Government. Neither such 'legal section' exist in the world. However acquainting you again Brhmand Pujan is a book published in 1999 and it is registered under Copyrights law of India. Pls properly re-read the notice on that offered website. It's an ISBN No. issued by the Government of India and not aspiring / under trial- training editors of some private firm or voluntary  organisation. Moreover Brhmand Pujan is registered under School/College Educational Department of the Government of India. Any Governing Educational dept. never register any vague philosophy unless it is meaningful or useful for educating students or mass in whole. Religions has no place there. Within few days original certificate may also be posted on the news site which show a government stamp. I had made this request to the publisher.

And what I feel Chirag from your quotes above you had hurriedly, hastily gone on that news website and read the name of the newspapers so you are praising or acknowledging reputed newspapers who had covered news on Naresh Sonee or Brhmand pujan book but you are ignoring the content published by these reputed newspapers  for Brhmaand Pujan or Naresh Sonee. There was a press conference even on Naresh Sonee. Had you noticed that some newspapers had also criticized the matter? I request you or everybody whomsoever wish to join this controversial debate to prior  summit here the whole content of news Hindi to English what actually the news & reviews said along  with dates & facts. This will be a generous contribution from you or all who are helping or opposing this controversial page on Brhmoism to get deleted or grow. However, running or flying away by throwing some dirt or pebbles on the page, author or me is not a responsible job of educated editors in wiki indeed. With regards- --Dralansun (talk) 17:10, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Request Wikipedia-Arbitrary intervention urgently in this matter For instance…..My case an stakes of Brhmoism, Esa Masi , Esa seeks Wikipedia-Arbitrary intervention urgently. For instance….. Mythology, Superstitions , Blind Faith , Fictions , Philosophy , Religions , Spiritualism , Consciousness  are awkward or illogical claims to get Registered/Notifications/ References. Yet wikipedia has such topics otherwise which wikipedia / encyclopedia media caretakers paparazzi has noticed  Buddha getting enlighten under Banyan tree, however Krishna orating Gita discourses to Arjun  during crucial hours of  busy bleeding war , or  Jesus doing miracles or issuing commandments. In those days there were no internet, media or paparazzi to register, record claims references or sources and yet their claims are recorded in wiki. Naresh Sonee's Brhmoism is not a superstitious, blind faith institute or any religion. It's a self thesis of philosophy, a novel way offered to realize 'Universal God or it's spiritualism.

Needless to argue more - Various news papers had either reported or recorded the factual existence of such matters through news and reviews. Claiming and recording are two different aspects and so cannot be measured or weight with equal parmeters. Even internet search throw many pages and hits on Naresh Sonee and Brhmaand Pujan existance or notability What else this debate needs? Just fight like school boys only to prove the existence of such ‘genuine voice’ wrong? Should not such crab fight end in wikipedia to claim me wrong and concentrate to read the complete article and then realize what is the ‘ intention or purpose’ of Brhmoismand why it should not be ignored by wikipedia.

I agree and apologise that my tone or flair of language or interpretations may be worng in the 'questioned'article. but can't all be improved by gentle generous editors to wiki? Should only professionally managed trust who profit or are previlaged to promote, propogate themselves with money or otherwise under the flags of some religion be posted on wikipedia either. Here are some lively prove- Asaram Bapu, Murari Bapu , Deepak Chopra and many more. I leave this matter to the expert senses of Wikipedia-Arbitrator. Arbitrator should read my appeal of discussion below and read the 'intention or purpose'of articles and decide why this notable page should not be in wikipedia? Regards --Dralansun (talk) 16:16, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

gives many hits in 0.03 seconds which Hon’ble Administer should selfly check pls. Below are examples of google hits-
 * Writing Naresh Sonee Brhmaand Pujan on google search
 * Google Give So Many Search Hits For Naresh Sonee & Brhmaand Pujan

Reference-Notability-Verification can the Administrator get from below mentioned sites. They are in formet pix of many HINDI NEWS PAPERS coverage on Brhmand Pujan.

So if you still feel doubtful, translations of these news-reviews or content of the book should be sought or confirmed by Wiki Indian Project Community or WikiProject Hindu philosophy who are expert in Hindi-English Language or such subjects. Usually roaming editors of Wikipedia are interested in particular subjects so do not help.


 * BRHMAAND PUJAN is registered under Government of India
 * Ministry of Human Resource Development,
 * Brhmaand Pujan - Brhmoism ; Copyright Registration No.is L-21496 / 2003.
 * Other registration details can be get from above notability sites.

Debate on Notability should not challenge common sense. For instance: Many ‘Tribal’ community or their regions or religions  are yet not explored /mentioned/covered/registered  by search engines so that does not means such matter or mind do not exist or wastes. Same way many Tribal religions or community has or do not have written literatures due to lack of approach or awareness  but Geography / History  channel or encyclopedia explore and cover them because such wise class  are  knowledge hungry to seek and spread information and knowledge.

Same way- Literature/News/Reviews of Brhmaand Pujan or Brhmoism cannot be denied from above given site. They are enough to prove notability/verification/references/acknowledgements. For instance Christians in India are commonly and generally 90% called 'Esai'. To Jesus Indian calls 'Esa' and such words do not exist on internet or English world.

Carefully note: Only 10 to 20 % literate class in India are familiar with Jesus or Christians and they too prefer names to be called 'Esa' to Jesus & 'Esai' to Christians. But does that means or proves that ‘Esa' Jesus or ‘Esai’   Christians  never exists &  will never meet standards of today’s internet or wikipedia or encyclopedia? Wiki Editors should judge the subject or issue from it’s very existence or notability-references and not through  the popularity of a ‘subject, matter or community’ existing on ‘internet  search hits’  mere. How one can get stamped from the Government / associations/ missions in such cases of notability? For instance on internet- no body knew what 'body piercing' was 12 years ago ? All started from tribals – or say came to fashion again with someone’s efforts to change the fashion to past. But can you erase 'Body Piercing from wiki now ?

So today with due respect to Wiki & the objectors here of Brhmoism – Pls. allow me to start a new page on Esa or Esa Masi the Jesus of/from India and Esai the Christians of/from India. And then, let Christians of the world challenge and acknowledge my stake that this two words lacks it's authenticity, references-notability-verifications etc. Today Esai, Esa Masi words you may not find on internet search hit. But Jesus and Christianity in India are popular by such two names mainly.

Till then good wise minds should allow my pages to stay & are requested never to delete my matter of Brhmoism, Isa Masi or Esai unless verified or judged from the judgmental angles of Hon'ble Administrators/Arbitrary sections who are concerned members of  WIKIPEDIA. Deleters or objectors should empathy the pain one put into creating an article. I beg the critics to completely read the intention or purpose of the article in question and then follow their impulse and also help me out in improving Brhmoism, Esai Esa masi format. I suggest the Administrator should also clear the Esa search diricting to my raised page Esa Masi the Indian Jesus. No body should be allowed to scrap such Universal pages of wiki interests. People like me may lack language or grammar approach but my ‘contents’ matters significant to world.

And pls. mind well Brhmaand Pujan or Naresh Sonee has a good hit than Esa Masi or Esai on any so called search engine. Followers of Esa Masi are millions Esai in India but they lack authenticity on search engine. The same claim is of Brhmoism today. For instance ; Esa, Esai , Esa Masi  does not have a single hit on search engine but these names has multimillions followers in India.

To prove my claims right, for instance on date July 27, 2008-

Jesus who is called Esa in India by this name has not even gives a single hit on google
 * *ESA SEARCH HIT is 'NIL' on GOOGLE

Christians who are called Esai  in India by this name  has not a single hit on google
 * *ESAI Search HIT is 'NIL' on GOOGLE

Jesus who is called Esa Masi in India by this name has not a single hit on google :
 * *ESA MASI Search HIT is 'NIL' on GOOGLE

Regards/--Dralansun (talk) 12:31, 27 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment, Dralansun has created articles on Naresh Sonee and Brhmaand Pujan/ Brhmand Pujan in the past that have resulted in deletion because of notability issues. There has apparently been some coverage in Hindi-language newspapers, but whether it is enough or of suitable quality to satisfy notability, I do not know. Aleta  Sing 19:53, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions.   —Aleta  Sing  20:07, 28 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Strong delete This is unsourced OR, and possible nonsence. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 04:36, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Alan Sun reply to above Schism, I understand your emotionally hurt and your feeling toward your own religion so you had strongly opposed above. Going through your Ism schism I have noticed you are a strong believer of Vaishnu Dharma Vaishnavism and its member too which is a staunch private religion in India and alike other religion too you too strongly believe in superstitions, blind faith. And so how could you or any other religion could so easily entertain or surrender to such page Brhmoism who want to spread non-bias community and unite the world in ‘One Religion’. Brhmoism is not a professionally religious expert people. We have no missionary or religion. It’s a slow and self progressive people of like minds. We only wish to ‘unite every religion of the  world  sharing love, brotherhood so You too should join us without leaving your religion. We have full respect for every religion. So will you mind translating the Hindi paper first what it say about Brhmaand Pujan and then come to any conlusion. In the news there Rajisthan Patrika & Dainik Bhaskkara renowned Vaishnuvi  Pandit Saint Vallab of Rajastahan had already praised the book in an temple inauguration in Rajasthanwhere the Saint/Priest was called. Both news paper had covered in their news 5 years back. Have courtesy and broad mind Schism, The world and wiki is for all- May Brahman give you sense and empathy others situation also. Soon we will be posting one college principal letter and Vaishnuvi Sanasta Guru letter on the news-review sights. read it what it say? It's a is very awkaward & humilating situation here as the fighit or this battle is being fought with all of you at one side. It reminds me of great people like Arjun, Krishna , Jesus , Buddha , Mohemed who all were one man army first and the world recognised their deeds only after their death.God bless u all who oppose too -Regards --Dralansun (talk) 09:58, 29 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Speedy Delete: OR term and propagation of a single book, which is NOT a RS.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 14:39, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete - Upon further review, this is clearly an advertisement. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 15:20, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Looks like a new religion based on a self-published pamphlet, but no notability. ~ priyanath talk 15:40, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.   —Aleta  Sing  19:45, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

THIS CASE NEED ALL NON-RELIGIOUS EDITORS OR WIKI ARBITRATORS HERE WHO ARE WISDOM FULL OR LOOK TO EVERY RELIGION WITH EQUAL LOVING & RESPECTING EYES HOWEVER, STAUNCH LOVERS OF THEIR RELIGION WILL NEVER DIGEST THAT THEIR LONG TIDIOUS HARD WORK DONE ON WIKIPEDIA OF THEIR PRIVATE MYTHOLOGICAL RELIGIONS GET CHALLANGED OR DISTURBED BY BRHMOISM. THIS IS THE REASON MY ARTICLE SAY-BRHMOISM IS FORBBIDDEN AS/BY RELIGION. ON THIS DELETION PAGE TOO IT'S NOTHING ELSE BUT BRHMO-PHOBIO SPREADING LIKE VIRUS IN WIKIPEDIA. ARBITRATOR MUST PLS. CHECK MY CLAIM AS MAXIMUM OF THE CRITICIZER ON THIS DELETION PAGE HAS WRITTEN/CONTRIBUTED MANY ARTICLES ON THEIR PERSONAL MYTHO RELIGION SUBJECTS. NOW I LEAVE ON WIKIPEDIA HEAD TO DECIDE IF I AM HURTING MANY SENTIMENTS OF THEIR EDITORS OR ADMINISTRATORS HERE. BELEIVE ME I RESPECT EVERY RELIGION. JAI BRHMAAND- I HONOUR ALL OF YOU AND THE 'GOD UNIVERSE'- THE BRHMAAND.MY APPEAL TO YOU ALL IS 'LET WE ALL RELIGION UNITE & LOVE/RESPECT EACH OTHER'. WHAT WRONG BRHMOISM PHILOSOPHY SUGGEST ? Regards --Dralansun (talk) 19:43, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi Dralansun, if your CAPS lock key is stuck, you can use the shift key to type normally. 202.54.176.51 (talk) 07:45, 30 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. The article is mostly filled with OR, but too little evidence of significant coverage by independent reliable sources. Does not pass WP:N. Nsk92 (talk) 21:44, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete in the absence of third-party sources. Charles Matthews (talk) 05:58, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete: for all the reasons mentioned above. Don't want to do a repeat telecast. --Deepak D'Souza (talk • contribs) 06:06, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Per everything above. GizzaDiscuss  &#169; 10:27, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions.   —Aleta</b> <sup style="color:#0095B6;"> Sing  22:52, 30 July 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.