Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maitreya Ishwara


 * 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   speedy delete primary editor's request. Pegasus &laquo;C&brvbar;T&raquo; 03:11, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Maitreya Ishwara

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

The article fails WP:BIO, in that there is no indication that this person has been the subject of multiple independant biographical articles. Delete with the possibility of reinstatement if independant verification can be provided. TheRingess (talk) 21:21, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. No relevant hits for "Maitreya Ishwara" or "Wayne Anthony Unsworth" on Google News Archive or NewsUK. Google Books turns up an apparently independent management guide that quotes him without comment, but I can't find adequate sources for an article, and the current article doesn't cite any. EALacey (talk) 21:59, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as non-notable. Very few hits and reliable sources on Google. —  Wen li  (reply here) 02:14, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. As there are no reliable sources cited, I am persuaded that the article does not comply with the verifiability policy. Stifle (talk) 18:31, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.   -- Fabrictramp (talk) 20:59, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I am responsible for creating the article in question and adding most of the material. In response to the comments here, I must say that I find it surprising, disturbing even, that anyone would put up an article for deletion before it has even been completed.  I am loathe to criticise an uncompleted work.  That said, it is indeed a problem that there seem to be few references to draw upon for Maitreya Ishwara.  I have been hard pressed to find relevant material but I appreciate the importance of it and am still looking.  --Schnooksie  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Schnooksie (talk • contribs) 02:00, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I must say more. I take exception to comments such as "the article fails" and "the article does not comply".  The thing being referred to is not an article.  It is a semi-article, an article under construction, a draft.  Please do not post any more comments of this nature.  Please do post comments that may prove helpful in creating a useful, compliant, worthy article. -- Schnooksie  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Schnooksie (talk • contribs) 02:17, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
 * All articles in the main article namespace are not considered complete, but are required to meet the basic content standards, like WP:NPOV, WP:V and WP:NOR. If you would like more time to work on the article, consider moving it to a user subpage (or ask here if you don't know how to do that). Also, you have taken the quotations out of context. They do not say "the article fails" and "the article does not comply", rather "the article fails [the criteria at] WP:BIO", and "the article does not comply with the verifiability policy". Stifle (talk) 09:56, 15 May 2008 (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.