Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pradani Muthirulappa Pillai


 * 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   no consensus. (WP:NPASR). (Non-administrator closure) NorthAmerica1000 22:04, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Pradani Muthirulappa Pillai

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Delete for following reasons. 1. Fails WP:NOTABLE. The only reference I can find on the internet, apart from mirrors of the article itself, is a minor footnote here. Article so far as it refers to its subject is completely unsourced by citations (despite being flagged as unsourced since 2012). The sources relating to background appear to be Indian newspaper articles which cannot be verified. 2. On the article talk page the article author admits that the article is completely the result of WP:OR. Smerus (talk) 10:22, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep Gazetteer of India and Manual of the Ramnad Samastanam are books, not newspapers; the article's author said that the work was original in the sense of not being a copyright violation; I found another very small mention for the alternate name at Temples of the Setu and Rameswaram. The material said to be drawn from specific numbered pages of the books is not unverifiable, though they may not be verifiable on the internet. 24.151.10.165 (talk) 20:32, 24 August 2014 (UTC) Additional references: Tamil Studies, Volume 3, Heritage of the Tamils: Temple Arts, Ramanathapuram District: An Archaeological Guide, Journal of Tamil Studies, Issues 15-16 and Madras District Gazetteers: Ramanathapuram. 24.151.10.165 (talk) 21:12, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately all the references given by User:24.151.10.165 are merely passing references to the name. They give no support to WP:NOTABILITY of this character. Please read the standards at WP:NOTABILITY and specify which (if any) apply here - I would say none.On WP:OR, the article author has written: "I am the original author of this piece, which is a result of research done by me in Tamil Nadu Archives in Chennai." These archives are not cited, or citable.--Smerus (talk) 08:00, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
 * The significant sources are the books cited in the article. Please read: WP:SOURCEACCESS "Some reliable sources may not be easily accessible. For example, an online source may require payment, and a print source may be available only in university libraries or other offline places. Do not reject sources just because they are hard or costly to access." (emphasis added). Ramnad Manual (Madras, 1892) Pg. 7, 120-121, 167, 243-244, 248, 270, 287-290, 292-293, 295, 298-300, 306, 336-477, cited in the article, constitutes WP:SIGCOV assuming good faith, as we must: WP:AGF. 24.151.10.165 (talk) 12:47, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:50, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:50, 26 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Davey 2010 •  (talk)  15:04, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 09:53, 9 September 2014 (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.