Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kek Look Seah 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   keep. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 (talk) 02:19, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Kek Look Seah Temple

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No mention of notability, only link given is a youtube page. NetworkOP (talk) 22:14, 2 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep, tentatively. Sounds like you could have marked it as a stub, or perhaps tagged it for notability, or tried to develop the article from sources, yourself.  Has wp:BEFORE been performed?  There's no assertion in the nomination that sources are not readily available.  Note the article is in category of 19th century Buddhist temples, so it has some historical merit.  And there is a source, the Youtube video, included in the article.  No clear reason this should be at AFD, so I think "Keep" is appropriate. -- do  ncr  am  22:49, 2 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep Notable columbarium in Perak as per newspaper coverage: "Some of the more famous columbariums in Ipoh are at the Sam Poh Tong cave temple near Gunung Rapat, Perak Tong near Tasek and the Kek Lok Seah temple in Bercham." 24.151.10.165 (talk) 23:55, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Malaysia-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 04:47, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 04:47, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Buddhism-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:22, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
 * Comment Dropping "Temple" from the search helps me find this book coverage, which is The Development and Distribution of Dejiao Associations in Malaysia and Singapore: A Study on a Chinese Religious Organization, by CB Tan - 1985. The photo caption gives another name for it, also, which i didn't try searching on.  There are alternate names apparently.  I would not trust an assessment that the temple is not notable, if it is based on poor English-language searching on Google. -- do  ncr  am  02:57, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  03:26, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep Mentioned/described in a few books.-- Bladesmulti (talk) 10:23, 10 January 2015 (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.