Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Esa Masi


 * 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. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 00:19, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Esa Masi

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Another poorly-written and original research-based article about an unsourced religion that comes up empty on Google searches, similar to Esai and Brhmoism. Beemer 69  chitchat  19:27, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  22:54, 27 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. I can believe there are myths and stories of Jesus visiting India and an article could be written about these however this is not it. References that lead to Google searches aren't good enough - the author need to go through those google hits and find the one that supports his claims. Filceolaire (talk) 23:03, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

There is difference between ‘claim’ and ‘notability’. as ‘Myths to ‘Reality’. Such matter should not be debated or deleted  but posted on wiki as who said what ? Nobody has seen the past how or why old Bible converted into New Bible? My case an stakes of Brhmoism, Esa Masi , Esa seeks Wikipedia-Arbitrary intervention urgently. For instance….. Mythology, Superstitions , Blind Faith , Fictions , Philosophy , Religions , Spiritualism , Consciousness  are awkward or illogical claims to get Registered/Notifications/ References. Yet wikipedia has such topics otherwise which wikipedia / encyclopedia media caretakers paparazzi has noticed  Buddha getting enlighten under Banyan tree, however Krishna orating Gita discourses to Arjun  during crucial hours of  busy bleeding war , or  Jesus doing miracles or issuing commandments. In those days there were no internet, media or paparazzi to register, record claims references or sources and yet their claims are recorded in wiki. Naresh Sonee or Brhmoism is not a superstitious, blind faith  institute. Various news papers had proved his factual existence through news and reviews. Even internet search throw many hits on him and Brhmaand Pujan. What else this debate needs? Just fight like means school boys only to prove the existence of such ‘able voice’ wrong? Should not such crab fight end in wikipedia to claim me wrong and concentrate to read then realize what is the ‘ intention or purpose’ of Brhmoism. Should only professionally managed trust who profit under the name of some religion be posted on wikipedia either Asaram, Murari Bapu , Deepak Chopra. I leave this matter to the expert senses of Wikipedia-Arbitrator. Regards--Dralansun (talk) 18:06, 28 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Strong delete OR and POV. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 11:40, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete: Just the Hindi word for Jesus, an article already exists.--Redtigerxyz (talk) 14:48, 29 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. It's Isa not "Esa". The article on Isa already exists: Isa (name). 202.54.176.51 (talk) 03:48, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Article is a mix of unsourced claims, original research, and self-promotion of Brhmoism. Edward321 (talk) 23:15, 31 July 2008 (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.