Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Criticism of Gandhi


 * 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 of the debate was delete. Mailer Diablo 01:00, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Criticism of Gandhi
Salute to All - I nominate this article for deletion because:

(1) The data is cut from Mahatma Gandhi and pasted to create a fork, undermining the quality and integrity of a featured article.

(2) There are no sources.

(3) It is not named as per Wikipedia naming conventions.

To add further, this fork was unilaterally created and should have been discussed first at Peer review/Mahatma Gandhi/archive1. Rama&#39;s Arrow 21:10, 16 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete Rama&#39;s Arrow 21:10, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
 * If I ventured a guess, I'd say this is meant to be some sort of posthumous attack article. Normally something like that would fall under an A6, but since I don't know if that would be the case for someone deceased, I'll have to go with Strong delete. Delete as per nom.--み使い Mitsukai 21:14, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: No Mitsukai, its not an attack article, but a hasty and unnecessary creation of a well-meaning editor. Rama&#39;s Arrow 21:16, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Odd, as it seemed like someone was trying to do one without tipping the boat, yet not doing a good job of it. But since you say it's not, I'm probably overreacting.  Changing my vote to reflect that.--み使い Mitsukai 21:25, 16 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete As nom says it is unsourced, possibly OR and it feels as pretty shallow. Pavel Vozenilek 21:36, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. While an objective, sourced indexing of the viewpoints of Gandhi's peers might be valuable, this is simply not up to that standard - it's unsourced - and certainly not up to the editorial standard of the Gandhi article.  I say toss it.  ikkyu2  ( talk ) 03:47, 17 February 2006 (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.