Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ISKCON Prabartak Sri Krishna Temple


 * 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. Liz Read! Talk! 23:36, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

ISKCON Prabartak Sri Krishna Temple

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

The cited sources are (1) the organization that runs the temple, and (2) Struggle for Hindu Existence. The latter is a website with no reputation for accuracy or fact checking, and appears biased. Their source is ISKON TRUTH, which also sounds non-independent. In any case, all the second source says about this temple is that a devotee there was investigating an attack at another temple. Searches in English and Bengali found no independent, reliable, secondary sources containing significant coverage of this temple, so it fails WP:GNG, and Wikipedia should not have a stand alone article about it. Worldbruce (talk) 23:23, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture, Hinduism,  and Bangladesh. Worldbruce (talk) 23:23, 20 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Comment. I managed to find the real source for this article using Earwig's Copyvio Detector on an early version of the article. That source is:
 * Kreately Media is a self-publishing platform. Alt News describes Kreately as a "factory of hate and misinformation". -- Toddy1 (talk) 23:36, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Kreately Media is a self-publishing platform. Alt News describes Kreately as a "factory of hate and misinformation". -- Toddy1 (talk) 23:36, 20 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete I think it’s been established at AfD that individual ISKCON centres aren’t notable. Mccapra (talk) 23:53, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non-notable building. Wikipedia is only meant to have articles on buildings like this if reliable secondary sources write about them. The most useful source for this building that I could find was a self-published article on Kreately Media. -- Toddy1 (talk) 11:59, 21 March 2023 (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.