Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mediated democracy in Ayodhya debate


 * 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. Obviously not mergeable, WP:OR essay.  Sandstein  08:50, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Mediated democracy in Ayodhya debate

 * – ( View AfD View log )

There already exists an article by the name Ayodhya dispute and this could be a section in the same article. Otherwise, mediated democracy is not an event or a notable subject. Also, the title reflects POV and the content of the article also reflected POV before it was cleaned up. This could be a site of vandalism. Noopur28 (talk) 17:42, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 02:29, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Deleteinaccurate title and redundant article, content already covered, and the article does appear personal reflection/opinion--  Ð ℬig XЯaɣ   14:24, 10 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete or merge to Ayodhya dispute wherever necessary. I don't think its good enough for a separate page.  Lynch 7  17:12, 11 April 2012 (UTC)


 * I have restored the removed content from the Mediated democracy in Ayodhya debate. This is necessary while the article is being discussed for deletion. — Nearly Headless Nick {c} 22:11, 11 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Merge/Redirect to Ayodhya dispute. The actions done by the nominator, ie removing close to 16k bytes of data, including references and even the category seem to indicate POV pushing. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 08:27, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't agree. The material itself was POV material, and had it been not up for deletion, that was actually not a bad thing to do. The presence of references does not necessarily mean that whatever is written is good. I agree with Sir Nick's revert because it was needed to determine consensus at this AfD.  Lynch 7  09:14, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Agreed, whatever was there earlier seemed like a biased/opinionated essay. The nominator, could've added, , , etc. to the page. I believe the page can be cleaned up if sufficient time and attention is given to it. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 09:33, 14 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. The title does not reflect the content which is simply a fork of Ayodhya dispute where all of these issues are covered in appropriate detail.  Eluchil404 (talk) 04:16, 15 April 2012 (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.