Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roop Chand Joshi (2nd nomination)


 * 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 consensus is that this individual does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability. The only arguments against its deletion were by the articles creator/main contributor to the page. PhantomSteve/ talk ¦ contribs \ 18:31, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Roop Chand Joshi
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Previously deleted for lack of notability -- this version has a few more sources, but given the language issues I can't tell if this is enough. -- Fabrictramp &#124;  talk to me  04:46, 24 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp  &#124;  talk to me  04:46, 24 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp  &#124;  talk to me  04:46, 24 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep - the first deletion was done in hurry without any scope of giving contributors chance to add sources and expand the article. If you see it was not even relisted and deleted just on basis of one single vote. Therefore, I have created this article with more sources and information. Roop Chand Joshi is regarded is originator of new line of thinking and interpreting the ancient Jyotisha shashtra of India. The person is certainly notable and article is a Strong Keep.Jethwarp (talk) 05:18, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RL0919 (talk) 05:21, 1 October 2019 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 08:59, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 02:05, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 02:05, 9 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete per nominator; FWIW, I was the nominator of the first AfD. A bunch of unreliable sources have been added, nothing else. &#x222F; WBG converse 17:43, 10 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Reply Wikipedia is encyclopedia - the article is of encyclopedic values - if you have to learn vedic astrology today - the books of Roop Chand Joshi are a must to get in-depth topic and get masterly over the subject. Please note that none of the sources are unreliable. There are even newspaper article cited which mention that his birth day is celebrated please explain a bunch of unreliable sources. In fact he has been the only author who has written this science in urdu and in verse. All other ancient texts on astrology  are written in sanskrit. Even most famous western astrologer Cheiro learnt this science from India.  I hope better sense prevails before deleting the article.   Jethwarp (talk) 05:42, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete as per the nomination. The article Fails WP:GNG. Kutyava (talk) 03:34, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Reply - I am at loss to understand that how an article on the author of Lal Kitab, who has created a new branch in Astrology does not pas WP:GNG. one can just check the link on Lal Kitab is viewed as a new branch of astrology or not ? Roop Chand Joshi chose to remain away from lime light, in obscurity, was a mystic and simple man and never ever claimed name and fame for his work, which he dedicated to world - denying an article to his name would be injustice, when sources have been provided, which all name him to be the author and founder of this branch.  Thanks Jethwarp (talk) 04:48, 14 October 2019 (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.