Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Palli-panchashika


 * 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. Stifle (talk) 12:55, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Palli-panchashika

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Deprodded. I originally prodded for: Original research and no WP:RS for this pesudo BLP. It's been expanded upon and only gotten worse. It appears to be about a book, or maybe about the author. Searching for the title yeilds nothing relevant (and barely anything at all) for both books and web search. Shadowjams (talk) 22:42, 23 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete. This is total garbage, we're not a dumping ground.  JBsupreme  ( talk ) ✄ ✄ ✄	 23:01, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Unceertain I gather this is a particular work of literature--I gather it is a descriptive lyric poem of a particular type called a Khandakavya (about which we do not seem to have an article).  The present article is an analysis of the poem: a detailed description, with some commentary.  For all I know, the poem might or might not be notable, but I don;t see how the description of it can be called nonsense -- if it is by any chance  famous poem, and the source for the commentary can be found, it would be an acceptable article.  DGG ( talk ) 23:10, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
 * LOL. No.  Unsalvageable.   JBsupreme  ( talk ) ✄ ✄ ✄	 23:50, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
 * With all due respect, this may highlight the fundamental differences between DGG and many others here regarding unsalvageable articles. I think that AfD is about articles not topics, and as articles go, this one is completely useless, nor does it appear to be useful scaffolding for someone to build on. Shadowjams (talk) 10:30, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. It really does look unsalvageable. Google returns no relevant results for "Palli-panchashika" or "Acharya Manmohan". — Rankiri (talk) 00:45, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
 * google does not strike me as a usable source for modern sanskrit poetry. JB, please answer my argument. Does the fact that the article has been written poorly mean the subject is unacceptable? What steps have you or the nom taken to see in appropriate sources if it is perhaps a notable poem?  DGG ( talk ) 01:19, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
 * No matter how you look at it, zero results on Google seems fishy. Google indexes pages in all languages, including Sanskrit, and Google Books contains dozens of works on the subject. Besides, we still need at least some form of verification, don't we? — Rankiri (talk) 01:31, 24 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete Unsalvageable essay/opinion/analysis of some literary work. Edison (talk) 01:20, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:03, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Article with literary importance.google has a little stock of information about the modern sanskrit poetry. The Panchashikaa type of Poetry is very famous particularly in Sanskrit like Choura-panchasika. secondly the Pallipanchasika of Vanikavi Manmohan acharya is a monumental work and about 3 scholars are engaged in doctoral research in pallipanchasika. This article will add a new feather to the cap of wikipedia.prof.p.k.mishra — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr.p.k.mishra (talk • contribs)
 * 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.