Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Feast of Saint Raphael, Ollur


 * 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   keep. Kevin (talk) 23:51, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Feast of Saint Raphael, Ollur

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Delete. Seems to be a non notable festival for the church. At most a blurb under the saints page regisatering his feast day but alone it isn't quite that notable as all catholic churchesz have fundraisers for their patron saints. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 15:25, 28 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete nothing here to suggest this festival is particularly remarkable. Aiken &#9835; 16:15, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep, in the first instance. There was already one reliable independent source (The Hindu); just in an hour or so I've managed to add a reference to one book that mentions the festival as drawing thousands of pilgrims, and another that treats some aspects of the art history of the shrine where it's held (there's a lot more of that online, but not, from what I can judge, in reliable sources). This is the sort of thing where we really have to make some effort to overcome WP:BIAS - not by blind inclusionism, for sure, but by giving some leeway, and getting people that actually speak the relevant languages involved in the process. --Paularblaster 01:00, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
 * No one is saying that it is non notable because of it's location or demographics. The concern was there wasn't anything that set this apart from other church festivals for saints.Hell In A Bucket (talk) 02:14, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I certainly wasn't suggesting that it had been, and had no intention of giving that impression. The point about systemic bias, as I take it, is that it's a result (not a conscious choice) of the location and demographics of most wikipedia editors, very few of whom, certainly including myself, will have the background, interests, and language skills needed to make a well-judged call on material like this. That's also why I qualified my "keep" with "in the first instance". It may well be that there are editors with the skills needed who will judge that this is not notable enough. --Paularblaster 09:07, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tim Song (talk) 00:11, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  -- - Spaceman  Spiff  00:25, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions.  -- - Spaceman  Spiff  00:26, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Notable and verifiable. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 02:49, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep apparently enough sources for notability as a major religious event.    DGG ( talk ) 03:17, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. Has been written about by multiple third-party sources. Loves  Macs  (talk) 03:20, 4 November 2009 (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.