Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comparison of Buddhist Monasteries in the Asia-Pacific Region


 * 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.  Sandstein  12:48, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Comparison of Buddhist Monasteries in the Asia-Pacific Region

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I don't think we should be comparing monasteries. Those are not comparable.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:06, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and WP:NOR. These monasteries don't even have articles. (Zealandia?) Clarityfiend (talk) 01:34, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment. What, none of the Buddhist monasteries in the entire Asia-Pacific region are notable? This will be huge, the editors have barely started; review the original concept. I'm thinking more columns, including ratings on adherence to each of the Ten Precepts. Jack N. Stock (talk) 02:23, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. I added a little to what is clearly a work in progress. This could become a great place to start for those interested in this topic. There are a few hundred Buddhist monasteries in the Asia-Pacific region that have WP articles and can therefore be assumed to be verifiable and notable (Tibet, China, India are all in Asia-Pacific). A neatly organized table with brief summaries of their features must be considered notable. Yes, there are other lists, but nothing like this that I could find. For example, List of Buddhist temples is just a list, no summary, and doesn't focus on residential monasteries. Another example, List of Tibetan monasteries could be helpful to editors of this list, but it is less geographically extensive, and includes ancient monasteries that have been destroyed. Jack N. Stock (talk) 03:43, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
 * If the argument is that you don't like comparisons, then perhaps move it to another namespace. That isn't an argument for deletion. As for WP:NOR, I can't really see that here. The creator is not visiting every Buddhist monastery in the Asia-Pacific region, there are clearly sources but they are not being cited by the inexperienced creator. The better response is to mark with the "citation needed" template, and perhaps some additional coaching. As this article was created yesterday and the only maintenance tag was "orphan" added a matter of hours ago, this is a premature AfD. Jack N. Stock (talk) 04:06, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. This seems to be a touristic guide to monasteries even though it doesn't describe itself as such. Wikipedia is not a directory. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 05:45, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Those listed so far don't seem to be monasteries that are of tourist interest (unless it's a touring monk or nun). Jack N. Stock (talk) 06:12, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
 * There are comments like "Accommodation Styles: ... Huts, Motel, Dormitory ... Cabins, Camping ... Limited numbers of guests are able to stay. Food is provided by alms-givers and there is no monetary charge." Only 7 monasteries have been listed so far, all in Australia. The table also has columns for "Retreat Type" and "Volunteer Roles", but none of the entries have been filled in yet. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 07:03, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Monasteries are residential, so accommodation style is a relevant part of the description. The part about "...limited number of guests... food provided by alms-givers..." was added inappropriately (for the context) by me (although I'd argue that sort of information is relevant to monastic life). I couldn't find info about where the monks and nuns live, so I just added what I could quickly find.
 * As for the limited info so far, the article was only started on Sunday. The creator has set a big task and it will take time and help. Even so, if it was just an overview of Buddhist monasteries in Australia, that in itself would be a notable. An individual monastery may lack sufficient notability for a stand-alone article, but a description of Buddhist monasteries in Australia (in which two or three are sufficiently notable for separate articles) or an overview of Buddhist monasteries in a multi-national region (in which several hundred are individually notable) is notable. Jack N. Stock (talk) 07:33, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Buddhism-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:34, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:34, 7 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:NOR and WP:NOTINHERETED. Article does not appear encyclopedic either. Ajf773 (talk) 15:41, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete per above, and WP:HOWTO. I would not oppose a "List of", but this is too much of a mess. Bearian (talk) 23:09, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Would it be better if the creator starts over and styles the article similarly to existing lists of monasteries, such as List of monasteries in Australia and List of Buddhist monasteries in Sikkim, or perhaps List of monastic houses in Lincolnshire and List of monasteries of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Moscow Patriarchate)? Jack N. Stock (talk) 01:07, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. There are other Websites dedicated to this kind of information, but Wikipedia just isn't the place for it. The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 04:17, 14 February 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.