Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/How I Became a Hindu


 * 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 redirect to Sita Ram Goel. There is consensus that this topic is not notable for a stand-alone article. All content from the article will be accessible in the page history and can be added to Sita Ram Goel, keeping in mind that you have to cite a reliable source. (non-admin closure) (t &#183; c)  buidhe  22:41, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

How I Became a Hindu

 * – ( View AfD View log )

I cannot find sufficient coverage in reliable sources for this to meet the basic threshold for notability. Auxentios (talk) 19:45, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  19:53, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  19:53, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone  19:53, 20 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Merge Into the article about the author. Oaktree b (talk) 23:45, 20 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep Written by a highly notable person, the book passes WP:NBOOK and WP:BOOKCRIT. A detailed review of the book can be found in following scholarly sources:


 * WP:BEFORE is relevant here. Eliko007 (talk) 03:36, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Merge into the author page, There is coverage about the author but at best trivia ones about the book. Hardyplants (talk) 20:12, 21 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep per sources mentioned by Eliko above.  killer bee    13:40, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete Non notable book. None of the criteria of WP:BOOKCRIT is meeting here. All books written by a notable person do not automatically become notable by inheritance. Excerpts and mentions only prove that this is not a hoax article, these links by themselves do not prove notability. The notability bar has been set higher as we cannot have article on every book. (see below points) Walrus Ji (talk) 08:57, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
 * [1] Himalayan publisher link is a book that posts an excerpt. The publisher is not well known or reliable.
 * [2] The link from "Motilal Banarsidass" is an excerpt by a non notable author.
 * [3] Anmol Publications not well known or reliable.
 * A notable book will have enough reviews and coverage in the reliable source so that enough material will be available to write a Wikipedia article on the same. This is not the case here. The lack of critical review by noted scholars, is itself a big giveaway that this is not a notable book. Without a reliable source backing the contents, I cannot support a merge.Walrus Ji (talk) 08:52, 28 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. Walrus Ji (talk) 19:53, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. Walrus Ji (talk) 19:53, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Walrus Ji (talk) 19:53, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   08:49, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Merge - Doesn't need its own article, but maybe could be included in author's article. Foxnpichu (talk) 11:36, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
 * , note that the content in the article is totally unsourced and possibly incorrect and WP:Original Research. Merge is not recommended in such case. Walrus Ji (talk) 12:02, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
 * - Well, would a redirect be better? Foxnpichu (talk) 20:09, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Merge to article about author. Archrogue (talk) 21:28, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Merge to article about author.  // Timothy ::  talk  23:48, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep per substantial coverage revealed by Eliko007. 67.80.214.83 (talk) 03:48, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:42, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Walrus Ji (talk) 05:16, 6 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Merge to the article about the author. Ngrewal1 (talk) 16:10, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Merge to author's aarticle. Spudlace (talk) 16:31, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
 * , you guys have asked to merge. Merge what exactly? Unless there is a reliable source supporting the content to merge, nothing can be merged. See my earlier comment above.Walrus Ji (talk) 16:39, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
 * It's verifiable that the book exists so if nothing else can be reliably sourced that fact can be added to the author's article and the redirect preserved. Spudlace (talk) 16:43, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
 * , The book is already listed in the author's bio. Indeed, there is nothing to merge. If you are !voting for a redirect, then you can clearly say that. !voting as merge gives an impression that you are approving the unsourced content to be moved to the author's bio. Walrus Ji (talk) 17:43, 11 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Sita Ram Goel, where it is mentioned. As the article currently stands there is no sourced content to merge. Eddie891 Talk Work 13:02, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I was going to say merge, but since there is nothing to merge, Redirect it to author's article. --আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 17:21, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep Per the sources provided by Eliko. The analysis of the sources that the author providing coverage to the book needs to be notable is pretty nonsensical. --Yoonadue (talk) 15:24, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Yoonadue's comment that basically means, "every source out there should be considered reliable by default", is in fact the most nonsensical argument in this thread. Please read WP:" Reliable " Source once again. Walrus Ji (talk) 15:30, 13 January 2021 (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.