Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Don E. Stevens


 * 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. The broad opinion seems to be that there is currently not enough coverage in reliable source to establish notability. Pax:Vobiscum (talk) 16:35, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Don E. Stevens

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Contested redirect. Questionable notability - main claim is being the editor (but not the writer) of a religious text. Provided references mostly appear to be primary or non-independent sources. MikeWazowski (talk) 14:00, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
 * notability to qualify for encyclopedic material - Example - Faredoon Driver, Eruch Jessawala (meher baba mandali) please note: New independent reliable sources that have written about Mr. Stevens Don E. Stevens were included - presenting notability - (Dragonbooster4 (talk) 14:11, 9 August 2011 (UTC)). — Dragonbooster4 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Comment - Dragonbooster4, please review WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS, as citing other examples of potentially non-notable subjects that have articles is not a reason to keep this article. If you feel those other articles are also in need of improvement, by all means find some reliable sources to improve them, or if those are unavailable then please propose those articles for deletion as well.  Thank you.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 15:02, 9 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - Sources are all primary/non-independent sources. I am unable to find any reliable source coverage to establish notability.  ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 14:59, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment If "writer of religious texts" is an indication of notability, here are six books he did author: . Hoverfish Talk 15:10, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment - May be taken for notability - Glow International:Spring 2011 issue - http://www.sheriarfoundation.org/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Product_Code=book123780 - (Dragonbooster4 (talk) 16:55, 9 August 2011 (UTC)).
 * Comment - The door bell of forgiveness by Don E Stevens - London: Companion Books, 2011 (Dragonbooster4 (talk) 17:04, 9 August 2011 (UTC)).
 * Comment If "writer of religious texts" is an indication of notability for Don E Stevens, then the issue is resolved. (Dragonbooster4 (talk) 17:14, 9 August 2011 (UTC)).
 * Delete I can not find any independent sources confirming his notability. And being a friend or a follower of notable persons doens't make one notable. Cst17 (talk) 17:21, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Disagree Comment Notability here has to do with Don E. Stevens and his Publications and associations with Meher Baba - This has nothing to with any friend or follower - This article is a part of Meher Baba's major figures, Not friends who knew meher baba's Mandali - Thank you (Dragonbooster4 (talk) 17:31, 9 August 2011 (UTC)).
 * In the article about Meher Baba he is only mentioned as the editor of one of his books, and again notability has to be proven by independent sources and I could not find any. Cst17 (talk) 17:59, 9 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Please notice, recent Disruptive edits in the article to change the content of sources by user ConcernedVancouverite. Any one is welcome to edit, but not this.  (Dragonbooster4 (talk) 17:43, 9 August 2011 (UTC)).
 * CommentThankyou - will try improving it

However, Please try to stop the non sense below by other user:

The page Meher Baba is being vandalized by users like ConcernedVancouverite. The page is being edited with statements such as Cult Leader - which was never indicated or stated by Meher Baba himself.

Further, the user ConcernedVancouverite is including the same misleading statements in Don e stevens article, which is not needed (Dragonbooster4 (talk) 18:09, 9 August 2011 (UTC)).


 * Comment. Just because a user has a different point of view than you does not make their edits vandalism. This is especially true when, as is the case with the edits by ConcernedVancouverite that you've protested, their position is backed up by reliable sources. —C.Fred (talk) 18:21, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment Could you keep the discussion on a central place, not posting on the talk pages of all the users involved? Cst17 (talk) 18:24, 9 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Note: I've protected the article for 6 hours to stop the edit warring. I have no idea if the info being added is helpful info that will show the subject's notability, or if it's poor claims masquerading as sources to save an article that should be deleted.  What I do know is that no one is talking on the article's talk page, and, instead, are having various scattered discussions and heavily reverting each other.  Y'all need to take this to the article's talk page and hash out the details there.  This AfD will run for 6 more days, and can even be relisted if it takes time to work through the sources.  Please do so.  Qwyrxian (talk) 06:05, 10 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete The only thing this article demonstrates is that somebody else entirely is claimed to be a cult leader. Le sigh... On its own, the subject fails WP:BLP. The only assertions of the man's notability come from his religious associates. ŞůṜīΣĻ ¹98¹ Speak 12:03, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete As per Suriel1981. If reliable sources for Don Stevens notability turn up in the future, we can reconsider having an article. - However, I would like to leave a note here that "OTHERCRAPEXISTS" in the face of a newbie, who ignores any notion of what reliable or secondary sources are, who has not even an idea about what we call vandalism, and who is quite apparently emotionally involved with the subject matter, is a highly provocative phrase, which may incite very bad reactions on the part of the newbie and should therefore not be used on newbies. OTHERSTUFF or WAX is a much kinder approach. Thank you. Hoverfish Talk 13:10, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete I agree the notibility is not established. As far as the subject being a mandali (disciple) of Meher Baba, the article on this term says there are at least 122 mandali and that Meher Baba also included others in this term. I don't believe working for an oil company is in itself notable, and I don't believe being a co-editor on a notable book qualifies either. There would need to be some demonstration of uniqueness. There are too many editors on Meher Baba's books, too many authors in the world, and too many deceased oil executives. Dazedbythebell (talk) 19:52, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 23:12, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 23:12, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Notability has to do with Don E. Stevens as narrator and editor of religious texts and not as a Businessman or seemingly or apparently considered opinions about whether he is any one's friend or what ever.(No emotions or sentiments are involved here) Thanx and regards. (Dragonbooster4 (talk) 12:52, 11 August 2011 (UTC)).
 * Comment Notability - The individual - Don E. Stevens, notability has to do with his own Published narrations related to meher baba
 * If so, why is none of his narrations mentioned in the text?Cst17 (talk) 13:11, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

1.I agree, with your statement, that there is no evidence Don E. Stevens writings attracted mainstream attention.
 * Why subject fails notability - in more detail: Stevens fails WP:AUTHOR - there's no evidence his writings have attracted mainstream attention. The article itself fails WP:BLP - "All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source" (the subject's minority religion associates cannot be classed as reliable sources for obvious reasons). Stevens has not "been the subject of multiple published secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject" and thus fails WP:BASIC. ŞůṜīΣĻ ¹98¹ Speak 13:15, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Comments:Discussion

2. But, Eruch Jessawala / Faredoon Driver / Bhau Kalchuri did not gather mainstream attention as well - As per wikipedia policies can you detail how the above three satisfy Wikipedia's notability irrespective of Meher Baba????

3. When compared with the above personalities and their significant association with Meher Baba, Don E. Stevens is notable. This cannot be argued.

4. The article on Don E. Stevens is not yet complete, His narrations were listed. I am in the process of gathering multiple secondary published sources on his narrations. Once the discussion about notability is complete, the article can be improved significantly.

5. Based on the above indications, Don E. Stevens could be considered in Meher Baba's major figures template, if required. (Dragonbooster4 (talk) 14:54, 11 August 2011 (UTC)).


 * Comment: The inclusion of Don Stevens' name in the template or his mention in any article does not depend on whether his biography article stands the notability criteria or not. However there are other considerations, of historical nature, which do not place Mr. Stevens as one of the few (say 10-20) top figures in Meher Baba's life, but rather as a top figure for some of his recent western followers. Hoverfish Talk 11:31, 12 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment: The existence of Eruch Jessawala / Faredoon Driver / Bhau Kalchuri on Wikipedia is not in itself a reason for the article to remain (see WP:OTHERSTUFF). As for the article not being complete, one of the reasons deletion debates usually are open 7 days is to give editors the chance to upgrade the article's content to the appropriate standard (if that is possible). ŞůṜīΣĻ ¹98¹ Speak 11:53, 12 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment Notability of Don E. Stevens may be considered now. (Dragonbooster4 (talk) 08:05, 15 August 2011 (UTC)).


 * Comment: The situation has not changed in any essential way, except in the number of links provided. I still do not see anything that establishes notability. Two of the other three disciples mentioned above have been day and night near Baba most of his life and have played very significant roles historically and therefore, were their articles nominated, I would definitely support them with a "keep" vote and I have significant arguments to offer to justify it. The third one has been near Meher Baba less than the others, but has compiled his 12 volume biography and has been, and still is, chairman of the AMBT in India, which is the sole official organization left behind by Meher Baba to maintain the archive and the historical grounds and shrine in Mereherabad, as well as facilitate access to them for the public. I am sure that there must be enough official material in India to more than justify his article, except most of us (usual editors of MB articles) are not India based and it is very hard for us to get our hands to such official documents there. But none of this, even according to the references provided here, is true for Don Stevens. Unfortunately many other people, even criminals, may have an article in Wikipedia due to the publics fascination and coverage for their notorious acts. But this is how it is. Notability criteria does not reflect the net value of a person, or wikipedia would be something like "The Book Of Life". The link given to the "Lists removed from Wikipedia" is itself a hint as to what may have already been discussed and decided in Wikipedia on the issue in the past. And BTW: I see 5 "Delete" votes above and not one "Keep" vote (not even one by Dragonbooster4, by the way, although one can be considered to be implied). Hoverfish Talk 11:00, 15 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment I am neutral on this. Its up to the expert admins in Wikipedia to decide (Dragonbooster4 (talk) 16:40, 15 August 2011 (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.