Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dr. K. Loganathan


 * 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. None of those arguing to keep the article has given any reason that has any weight under Wikipedia's policies. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 13:42, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Dr. K. Loganathan

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Delete, article is unclear on how this person is actually notable. it says alot about the claims and the books he wrote but not sources that show he passes WP:SCHOLAR or WP:AUTHOR Hell in a Bucket (talk) 01:27, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Malaysia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:52, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:53, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:53, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Behavioural science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:53, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:53, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

––ellapura (User talk:ellapura)  < Accept! He is contemporary philosopher educationalist on Tamil and Dravidian cultures. I have made use of his findings and published a research paper, see the link at the end. Dr. Loganathan of meykandar yahoo group finds Sumerian language Is archaic form of Tamil and Sanskrit. My hypothesis is a partial off.shoot from that finding, only if they have fluently spoken a language, they would have used it to write down. The edubbaa also praises how the sir.poems were spreading to tur far.off places. If this is true, we could expect sir phrases words in many of languages in use around the world. I also suggest to revise the observation that Sumerian language is dead, but alive in the form of Tamil. Based on Dr. Loganathan research inputs, research paper on e.dub.ba.a is published in reputed journal, please see: abstract: link: http://www.nitttrbhopal.org/journal/volume7/volume7issue2.pdf>
 * Delete. I see no evidence that this academic has made a significant impact in their discipline or meets any of the other carefully-crafted WP:SCHOLAR criteria. Nor, it appears, is there is significant coverage in reliable sources, per WP:GNG. --Mkativerata (talk) 09:46, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
 * ′′′Accept′′′. More referencing has been added to show that this academic is a scholar in several new fields of study. Highlights are the study linking Sumerian language as archaic Tamil as well as Agamic Psychology. ––machupichu5678 (User talk:machupichu5678) — Preceding undated comment added 11:05, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete unless evidence of notability can be found. Every source currently in the article either doesn't seem to mention Loganathan or is written by him. So there is no evidence of significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, nor is there evidence that he meets any of the criteria at WP:SCHOLAR. —Granger (talk · contribs) 13:44, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
 * ′′′Accept′′′ The sources quoted in the article clearly mention that Dr K Loganathan, also known as Ulagan is the author. Just to quote one example, ref 16 'Agamic Psychology and Religious Experience' is clearly written by him, his name is mentioned in that article. What other evidence do we need? It goes for all the other references given in that article.––machupichu5678 (User talk:machupichu5678)
 * Sources that are written by Loganathan aren't enough to show notability—we need reliable sources that are independent of him. See WP:Notability for more information. —Granger (talk · contribs) 13:38, 6 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment I've semi-protected the article for four days due to disruptive POV edits by two or three IPs, but obviously they were inserting negative material rather than trying to improve the article. I note the original creator is autoconfirmed but the one other account that added valid content is not. I have the article in my watchlist and will respond to any edit requests that could possible save the article from deletion, and I suggest the nominator do the same thing. § FreeRangeFrog croak 00:02, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete: per nom, I agree with the comments above, lacks notability.--Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 07:23, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
 * ′′′Comment′′′Dr Loganathan's finding that Sumerian is archaic Tamil is the first in the world. No one else, to the best of my knowledge has done such a thorough study to prove this link. I would equate his findings to Galileo Galilei finding. His findings are open to be debated. Many linguist have debated with him but no one has defeated him.He has been saying this for the past 40 years but not many have accepted it, which I believe is due to political reasons. But truth should be told. Why should 'TRUTH' be deleted? machupichu5678 (User talk:machupichu5678)
 * See WP:FRINGE and WP:TRUTH Hell in a Bucket (talk) 13:41, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

This is a view point to KEEP the article and NOT DELETE: Sumerian is the first civilization that created a script. Its the starting point of writing. Mesopotamian is the cradle of civilizations. Faith of the whole world originated there.
 * Strong delete - fails all the relevant policies and guidelines. ukexpat (talk) 14:22, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Whole world, thinks that the language spoken by Sumerians is an isolate. Most of the western linguistic scholars, dont know if Sumerian language is living at this point in time.

Dr. LogaNathan is the one giving a new direction to the linguistic world, through his research. His sumerian decipherings provide an actual purpose of religion and faith (as written by sumerians) which is still being followed by Millions of people in India, China and around the world.

He is the only one of the kind, who can reveal the secrets written in Mesopotamia. Humanity needs him. Humans should know about him. World will have to wait thousand of years to produce another Loganathan. If he is not there, humans will continue to live and die, without knowing - the secrets of Sumerian writings, the origin of faith, the purpose of religion in moulding humanity.

Thanks Rathinavel Raj K — Rathinavel Raj K (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * ′′′Comment′′′ - If we have to follow all rules, then Galileo Galilei and Charles Darwin would not have made it to Wikipedia with these rules. As I said earlier, Dr LOga's findings are pioneering studies especially the one linking Sumerian with Tamil. I think this is one occasion where WP:Ignore all rules should be applied. machupichu5678 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 08:03, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Take time and read the links, people are ignoring you because we've pointed you to why we have these policies and what's relevant but you make assertions that justmake no sense. Charles Darwin and Galileo are here because they are widely covered and cited by their peers. Being a pioneer doesn't make you eligible for a Wikipedia article, it just means you tried something new. Being notable requires something more so this is not an appropriate invocation of IAR. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 09:31, 8 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete. No reliable and independent sources that cover the subject in nontrivial detail, failing WP:GNG as well as WP:PROF. But more strongly, neutral coverage of fringe subjects (and a claimed link from Sumerian to Tamil is definitely fringe) requires mainstream sources so we can properly indicate how the subject's theories have been received. We have none of those sources either. —David Eppstein (talk) 08:35, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
 * ′′′Comment . Sumerian civilization being the oldest in the world and the first written language by Homosapiens being proven by this scholar as archaic Tamil is fringe? As I said earlier, this is a groundbreaking study, there are no mainstream sources to comment on this as they do not know of this link! The mainstream considers Sumerian as an isolate language. Dr Loga's study proves otherwise. The main idea of having this article on Wikipedia is for the mainstream sources to know and research further on this claim. Dr Loganathan is probably the only person on earth who is an expert in Sumerian and Tamil, and he could see the link. We can't expect the mainstream sources to see the link between a dead language (Sumerian) and an unheard language...Tamil, can we? -machupichu5678 (User talk:machupichu5678) — Preceding undated comment added 10:39, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
 * so if we can't expect significant mainstream reliable coverage you shouldn't expect it to pass WP:GNG or WP:VERFIABILITY Hell in a Bucket (talk) 23:43, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia has a global appeal and readers from a cross section have in interest in it, with a range of topics,Article on K.Loganathan has a backdrop on his 40 years of involvement in a particular stream of study, that has evinced interest in quite a few scholars.Now what is mainstream research and what is evidence is all very abstract, there can be counter stream an opposite view and evidence is evolving and subject to enlightenment,for instance earth was flat earlier, then round -it revolved round the sun or sun centric now there s recent research that earth spirals around vacuum and follows sun spiral.What is important is the contribution and not how long and how much it is acceptable, acceptance has many circumstances.Dr.K.Loganathan has a point of view and has been addressing these as research articles, internet debates and speeches, for this contribution his place in wikipedia can be secured.Kindly therefore dont propose to delete. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vraghava (talk • contribs) 04:54, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Can you show references to where "quite a few scholars" have discussed Dr Loganathan's theory in reliable sources? Wikipedia does not cover new theories when they are first put forward, only after they have been the subject of independent discussion and comment. The fundamental policy WP:No original research includes: "If no reliable third-party sources can be found on a topic, Wikipedia should not have an article about it." JohnCD (talk) 11:09, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Do Not Delete--Vraghava (talk) 08:07, 9 November 2014 (UTC)--Vraghava (talk) 08:07, 9 November 2014 (UTC) Five research Articles Published in International Institute of Tamil Studies Chennai.See the Link Below, It is a Government Organisation.

034 - December 1988	045 - 072	Sumerian Si-in and Old Tamil Cin : A Study in the Historical Evaluation of Tamil Verbal System

019 - June 1981	087 - 098	'என்று', 'என்பது' ஓர் இயக்கவிலக்கண விளக்கம்

016 - December 1979	084 - 098	இயக்கவிலக்கண கிளவியாக்க விளக்கம்

010 - December 1976	089 - 111	தொல்காப்பிய மரபுவழி மொழிப்புணர்ச்சி இலக்கணம்

008 - December 1975	040 - 061	Sumerian : Tamil of First Cankam

International Institute of Tamil Studies.

Articles — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vraghava (talk • contribs) 08:21, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vraghava (talk • contribs) 08:14, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

KEEP / NO_DELETE Dear Editor, Is there any scholars on Sumerian linguistics who have provided comment above (those who say Delete)? I dont see any scholarly comment from people qualified on the specific domain/area of research. No point in voting 'DELETE' without knowing the subject we are talking here. Some of the scholars show their ignorance (dont know Tamil, dont know about dialects of Sumerian). Dr Loganathan has rightly concluded that Sumerian dialects, eme kir and eme sal are same as archaic Tamil.

Kindly refrain from passing comments if you dont know about the subject in discussion. This is not a Voting platform. We are talking about knowledge and making it available for Human Beings. Atleast that was my thought about Wiki. Regards, Rathinavel Raj K (Not a puppet.. i live in Toronto, I have not met or spoke to any of the people here) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rathinavel Raj K (talk • contribs) 22:54, 10 November 2014 (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.