Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Whitwell


 * 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. The Bushranger One ping only 03:26, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Mark Whitwell

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's notability guideline for biographies. JamesUX (talk) 03:14, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment. Why not? --Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:27, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. Neither the sources presented in the article, nor what I was able to find online, represent adequate independent coverage to write an article about this person. He appears to fail the criteria at WP:BASIC:A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has been the subject of multiple published secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject. Notability is not inherited, so the subject's association with notable people (which is mentioned several times in the article) does not convey notability on this person. VQuakr (talk) 04:08, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete per VQuakr. GregJackP   Boomer!   02:00, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
 * The secondary sources, such as Elephant Journal, Yoga Journal are reputable sources. Please read both articles thoroughly.  In the first edition of TKV Desikachar's Heart of Yoga, Whitwell writes a 5 page introduction to the book as well as the introduction for the Patajali Sutra in all publications of this book.  Please communicate what is not notable? — Kelsea Barrett (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * I am a Vedic and yoga scholar and have independently tracked the lineage of Krishnamacharya before and after his lifetime. The translations of Whitwell books in English, Japanese, German, Croation, etc. serve as an important platform for the distribution of Krishnamachary'as knowledge throughout the world.  I reviewed the references, and they are accurate.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yogiraj Saraswati (talk • contribs) 03:16, 24 January 2013 (UTC)  — Yogiraj Saraswat (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 16:33, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 16:33, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 16:33, 24 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete. Nothing about him meets WP:BIO. Note that some of the refs are from books written by the subject himself. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 22:52, 24 January 2013 (UTC)


 * delete The sources here are to close to the subject. I'm not seeing adequate independent claim of notability. Andy Dingley (talk) 00:16, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - per Alan Liefting and Andy Dingley - SimonLyall (talk) 08:14, 25 January 2013 (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.