Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bua Kauri Baba Jitmal (Jhiri)


 * 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. Will rename to Baba Jitto (non-admin closure) Kharkiv07  ( T ) 22:35, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

Bua Kauri Baba Jitmal (Jhiri)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable saint.Was deprodded. Winged Blades Godric 12:54, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions.  Winged Blades Godric 12:59, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions.  Winged Blades Godric 12:59, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Spirituality-related deletion discussions.  Winged Blades Godric 12:59, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  Winged Blades Godric 12:59, 18 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep. Seems to be more commonly referred to as "Baba Jitto". Under that name, it's not hard to find some sources:
 * The article is weak because it is written from a believer's standpoint and retells a legend as fact, without the caveat that this is the story. It needs lines like "Both of these divine souls are worshiped in the form of total God today" rewritten entirely. But, the subject seems like a notable one. (Incidentally, "non-notable saint" seems almost oxymoronic) Mortee (talk) 00:23, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * The article is weak because it is written from a believer's standpoint and retells a legend as fact, without the caveat that this is the story. It needs lines like "Both of these divine souls are worshiped in the form of total God today" rewritten entirely. But, the subject seems like a notable one. (Incidentally, "non-notable saint" seems almost oxymoronic) Mortee (talk) 00:23, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * The article is weak because it is written from a believer's standpoint and retells a legend as fact, without the caveat that this is the story. It needs lines like "Both of these divine souls are worshiped in the form of total God today" rewritten entirely. But, the subject seems like a notable one. (Incidentally, "non-notable saint" seems almost oxymoronic) Mortee (talk) 00:23, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * The article is weak because it is written from a believer's standpoint and retells a legend as fact, without the caveat that this is the story. It needs lines like "Both of these divine souls are worshiped in the form of total God today" rewritten entirely. But, the subject seems like a notable one. (Incidentally, "non-notable saint" seems almost oxymoronic) Mortee (talk) 00:23, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * The article is weak because it is written from a believer's standpoint and retells a legend as fact, without the caveat that this is the story. It needs lines like "Both of these divine souls are worshiped in the form of total God today" rewritten entirely. But, the subject seems like a notable one. (Incidentally, "non-notable saint" seems almost oxymoronic) Mortee (talk) 00:23, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * The article is weak because it is written from a believer's standpoint and retells a legend as fact, without the caveat that this is the story. It needs lines like "Both of these divine souls are worshiped in the form of total God today" rewritten entirely. But, the subject seems like a notable one. (Incidentally, "non-notable saint" seems almost oxymoronic) Mortee (talk) 00:23, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * The article is weak because it is written from a believer's standpoint and retells a legend as fact, without the caveat that this is the story. It needs lines like "Both of these divine souls are worshiped in the form of total God today" rewritten entirely. But, the subject seems like a notable one. (Incidentally, "non-notable saint" seems almost oxymoronic) Mortee (talk) 00:23, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * The article is weak because it is written from a believer's standpoint and retells a legend as fact, without the caveat that this is the story. It needs lines like "Both of these divine souls are worshiped in the form of total God today" rewritten entirely. But, the subject seems like a notable one. (Incidentally, "non-notable saint" seems almost oxymoronic) Mortee (talk) 00:23, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * The article is weak because it is written from a believer's standpoint and retells a legend as fact, without the caveat that this is the story. It needs lines like "Both of these divine souls are worshiped in the form of total God today" rewritten entirely. But, the subject seems like a notable one. (Incidentally, "non-notable saint" seems almost oxymoronic) Mortee (talk) 00:23, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Delete:This article is bad from a quality standpoint; and a blatant violation of WP:NPOV. The state of the article, and the likelyness that the neutrality of the article will be disrupted by the non-neutral writing style of the original article if it gets rewritten lead me to the suggestion of applying WP:TNT.Burning Pillar (talk) 14:25, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep: Per Mortee. SL93 (talk) 03:34, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Rename as Baba Jitto.Glendoremus (talk) 04:25, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep: Jamesjpk (talk) 01:02, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2017 March 23.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 12:24, 23 March 2017 (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.