Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hayagriva Swami


 * 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. Spartaz Humbug! 20:15, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Hayagriva Swami

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )



Article is sourced by self-published, autobiographical sources. No independent reliable sources are found or can be seen in the search. Wikid as&#169; 10:44, 21 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions.  — Wikid as&#169; 10:51, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:28, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:28, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, see below. Comment. Borderline. It is difficult to say delete or keep. If keep, the article has to be edited to make it encyclopedic. MiRroar (talk) 20:37, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I guess MiRroar you have some sources in mind that support notability? Wikid as&#169; 20:41, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
 * No, and I looked some more and did not find any, just one local newspaper article that says Wheeler spent "Easier" vacation with his parents while he was in college. I am changing to delete. MiRroar (talk) 16:03, 23 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Strong delete Non notable, no reliable sources, nor assertion of notability. In addition, some of the sources sited are self published by an editor in this discussion - Henry Doktorski - who voted keep. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 00:52, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep he was a founding member of the New Vrindaban community, and he helped Prabhupada translate many of his books into English. Geneisner (talk) 05:12, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Is it covered in multiple reliable sources? If not what is the criteria for notability? Wikid as&#169; 07:01, 24 April 2010 (UTC) Note Since you are not answering or providing any reliable sources I take you can not support your keep argument.  Wikid as&#169; 10:54, 26 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep If the article about New Vrindaban is worth keeping, so is this article about New Vrindaban's co-founder worth keeping. (forgot to log in earlier) Henry Doktorski (talk) 14:01, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
 * That is not correct. He did not found (or co-found) New Vrindaban. This is not factual, and there are no reliable sources that say he is notable. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 22:36, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I will certainly be interested in hearing if he did and what is the fact here. I have to note that Henry Doktorski is under investigation on COI board, since he was a former employer/associate of the Hayagriva and wrote the article. I am not sure if you can take his vote seriously if he does not provide good independent sources for notability of this person. So far the article was tagged from last year and he failed to provide third party sources. Wikid as&#169; 08:30, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note to admin: "If the article about New Vrindaban is worth keeping, so is this article about New Vrindaban's co-founder worth keeping." is an example of logic that can not be used in AfD discussions, notability is not inherited (besides the fact that there simply no reliable sources to support the notion). Wikid as&#169; 08:32, 25 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Note Some of the self published sources are written by an editor in this discussion - Henry Doktorski - who voted keep. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 20:57, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Henry is also the author of the article, who is under investigation on WP:COI board. Wikid as&#169; 07:33, 27 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete - Not only can it not be established that this is notable, but this article fails our verifiability requirement. Absent any independent reliable sources, we can't be sure that this article is accurate, and since nobody has been able to find such sources, I don't see how this article can be kept. --  At am a  頭 17:17, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails WP:GNG as almost none of the sources are independent of the subject. Alzarian16 (talk) 11:56, 29 April 2010 (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.