Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rajputs and Buddhism


 * 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 of the debate was keep. bainer (talk) 03:51, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Rajputs and Buddhism
A rambling stub article, seems like nonsense. Opening it up for thoughts rather than speedy deleting for lack of context and patent nonsense. Harro5 05:23, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep see, article just needs expansion. Ashibaka tock 05:27, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I think I see where the guy is trying to go, but we're dealing with a non-native speaker and a really bizarre format job. The subject matter seems like a good idea, but I truly don't see how this can fit.  Keep if improved by someone familiar with the subject.  Ashibaka, you're up.  :) - Lucky 6.9 05:28, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
 * It looks to me like these topics could be merged into Decline of Buddhism in India, which covers the relevant time period. Bikeable 05:54, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge per Bikeable. --Alan Au 08:16, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

This is an important subject that is not often discussed. It is directly related to India's long tradition of permitting diversity of religious thought, and India's modern secularism.

The article needs to be expanded. I will add details and references. Rajput inscriptions and copperplates are the main source of direct information on this subject.

But may I ask Harro5 why this is "patent nonsense"? Please let me know. I will address those issues.

--Malaiya 15:52, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
 * When I first read the article, it seemed like a rant about nothing. However, this AfD has obviously told me otherwise (like I say in the nom, I wanted input from others) and if you can write this in useful prose then I am sure I would be happy to see this article stay. Harro5 21:56, 9 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Weak keep as the author appears to be in the process of expanding the article. It's not nonsense, just extremely lacking in content/context, particularly if you have no familiarity with Indian or Buddhist history.  Suggest it may belong as a subsection of either Rajput or Decline of Buddhism in India.  Let's not bite a newbie on this one. CarbonCopy 16:51, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak keep but one hopes this goes in the direction of encyclopedic rather than original research. I wouldn't call it nonsense; it needs sources, context, and should focus on scholarly consensus rather than controversy. Looking forward to seeing the result, Malaiya. rodii 18:23, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak delete though I will ad a cleanup-context tag. If it's improved, I will change my vote. Ifnord 18:49, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep because this sheds light on medieval history of India. Shivraj Singh 06:34, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Difficult to understand, so I can see how it could've been viewed as patent nonsense, but I think there's a good article-in-progress here once it goes through a few more revisions. -Colin Kimbrell 17:09, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak keep V1t 14:25, 14 December 2005 (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.