Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sai Dham Nottingham UK


 * 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. Sr13 22:12, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Sai Dham Nottingham UK

 * – (View AfD) (View log)
 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Unremarkable prayer centre for an unremarkable religion. Vanispamcruftisement. Contested prod. MER-C 02:15, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I would hesitate to call any religion "unremarkable", but I concur that this appears to be an advertisement for the meditation centre. &mdash;Resurgent insurgent 2007-05-08 02:41Z 
 * Delete Other than being a worship center, its pretty non-notable.  Corpx 05:59, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. To an outsider it reads rather like Private Eye's occasional St Cake's feature. BTLizard 07:31, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Sai Dham (Nottingham) has already been speedied twice (A7) and recreated apparently word for word identical. andy 12:16, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Yup, word-for-word identical's the word to describe this latest version. I would not consider a existent landmark to be speedyable as A7, though. &mdash;Resurgent insurgent 2007-05-08 13:01Z 
 * KEEP How can this article be edited so that it does not look like an advertisement? It provides the information required. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.10.68.236 (talk) 17:48, 8 May 2007 (UTC).
 * Delete doesn't appear to be notable, content is also a straight lift from the organisation's website so may also be a copyvio.  Eliminator JR Talk  22:56, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete NN. ¿SFGi  Д  nts!  ☺ ☻ 23:53, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per EliminatorJR — Wenli 00:50, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep on the grounds that a nom as being an "insignificant religion" is not acceptable. If this is the major center for the religion in the UK, however small the number of worshipers, it's notable. But that it is the major center does have to be shown, though I suppose from the comments it can be reasonably assumed. I think re-creating after speedy is not disallowed. DGG 02:07, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep the article has been altered now so it is different and not lifted from the website, also looking more notable and it is a multifaith centre, so it is not specific to any religion nor should be deemed "unremarkable" as this can be taken as offensive. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.10.68.236 (talk) 22:36, 9 May 2007 (UTC).
 * Comment - the article may look notable but that doesn't make it notable. All the preceding arguments still apply. andy 06:34, 10 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep informative, cant see anything wrong with it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 62.232.208.134 (talk) 16:37, 10 May 2007 (UTC).
 * Comment. Notability is supposed to be demonstrated in some way. If this was the only place of worship for one religion then it would be reasonable to assume notability (although better if it was clearly asserted). But the author has stated in this debate that it's multifaith and not specific to one religion, which makes it just one place of worship among very very many and therefore by definition not notable. andy 17:01, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep What more notability can the author add?! Shirdi Sai Baba is seen as a guru for hundereds of millions around the world, not just in India, white, black, asian etc... the fact that this is the first centre dedicated to him in the WHOLE of Europe is the most notable thing about this article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Saidhamnottingham (talk • contribs) 20:37, 10 May 2007 (UTC).
 * Please read WP:N to find out what notability means in wikipedia. On this basis there is still no evidence of notability in the article. andy 21:47, 10 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep looks notable enough to me —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.10.68.236 (talk) 17:48, 8 May 2007 (UTC).
 * The etiquette is one vote per editor. andy 09:06, 11 May 2007 (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.


 * Keep This organisation/centre seems to have a notable and unique element about it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 77.98.20.245 (talk) 11:10, 14 May 2007 (UTC).