Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Linga sarira


 * 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 of the debate was keep. Mailer Diablo 00:17, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Linga sarira
Unsourced and smells like original research (what does Kirlian photography have to do with a Sanskrit word for some theosophical concept? Besides, it states the extremely doubtful existence of astral projections as fact). Any salvageable content can be merged elsewhere. - Sikon 14:03, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment It's a yogic concept that has some references out there. It appears this article is more based on new age fluff (i.e. theosophy) than any historical content about yoga {Pranayama, etc).  I've no strong feelings either way on this, but if it gets kept I would urge verify, and sourcing tags be added and it be listed for cleanup somewhere that an editor with a greater knowledge of yoga than I could give it the attention it needs.--Isotope23 18:34, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep. Important concept in several religious and neo-religious traditions (Hinduism, Esotericism ....). Needs some rewriting/expanding. I might try to expand it more in a few days. --Mallarme 13:52, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep but include more references to Samkhya, Vedanta, Blavatsky, Alice Bailey, etc. I agree that at present it reads like original research (but it is not, as a simple google search will reveal), and that the article should definitely be cleaned up with more references, including references to the original Indian meaning (i'll try to add some material on the Samkhyan use of the term when i have time), and less unsourced statements.
 * Comment: Not meaning to criticise anyone's views, but surely whether you believe or don't believe in astral projection, or consider Theosophy to be new age fluff or an authentic tradition of contemporary esotericism, is irrelevant to whether this article (and other such articles) should be kept. e.g. I believe Creationism is a load of crud, but I still strongly support having articles on Creationism in Wikipedia.  I have noticed lately several articles of non-materialistic subjects have been marked POV and/or nominated for deletion.  As someone who values a diverse Wikipedia, this is of some concern.  Wikipedia is not a hobby horse for particular opinions, it is an encyclopaedia.  The Linga Sarira is a concept that was originally developed in Samkhya and Yoga and was adapted from there by Vedanta, and finally (in the late 19th century) by the Blavatskyian Theosophy, from which it was adopted by the Post-Theosophical (e.g. Alice Bailey) tradition.  Therefore it is a notable subject, and the page should be kept. M Alan Kazlev 02:59, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, what I believe in is irrelevant. It is also irrelevant that there are a lot of people who don't believe in it, and this article states it as fact. I just thought that this article is redundant. (However, the rewritten article is much more acceptable than the original one.) - Sikon 06:37, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
 * And likewise what I believe is irrelevant to whether the article should be kept or not :-)  Anyway I added some new material, and improved the material that is already there, so hopefully it's of a higher standard now! M Alan Kazlev 03:59, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Important concept. I find User:Sikon's dismissive attitude in his nomination towards historical concepts troubling. &mdash; goethean &#2384; 15:35, 15 March 2006 (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.