Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sarun Mata Temple


 * 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. Cirt (talk) 06:49, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Sarun Mata Temple

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

While a Google search indicates that the temple does in fact exist (I was suspicious, but I'm convinced of its existence), I cannot find anything relevant on GNews, GBooks, or GScholar. One would expect a mention in at least one of these if the temple were notable, but every single mention was the result of odd word combination throughout the document. Google did return a number of hits, but only 8 came back if you put the temple's name in quotes (and four of these were either from Wikipedia or from other sites' member edit pages). Basically, this seems to be a non-notable local church/temple without even any major press mentions, and therefore seems to fail WP:N. Tyrenon (talk) 03:40, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 11:58, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete without prejudice. Precedent suggests that local houses of worship need some kind of significance above mere confirmable existence to be notable, and no case is made for that in this article. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 14:01, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. No assertion of notablility. Niteshift36 (talk) 16:47, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment There's mention about this temple on a random geneology site as being founded in 1276 AD and referencing a book, The Golden book of India, Sir Roper Lethbridge, but I'm unable search for the temple within that. If it is indeed that old, then there should be Hindi references at least. -SpacemanSpiff (talk) 18:34, 11 June 2009 (UTC)


 * The references that give the 1276 date are not reliable sources. Unfortunately.--RegentsPark (My narrowboat) 21:32, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * That is one place I would need to beg someone to help me out on the foreign language side. I know no Hindi whatsoever.  However, I am also willing to offer the conjecture that the 'Temple' in question may not be the actual temple, but the organization of it; I've seen this claim scattered around in one or two of the pages discussing the temple, but nothing more than passing that's independent.Tyrenon (talk) 18:56, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. The Lethbridge book would be a reliable source if it confirmed this, but it doesn't appear to contain the words "Sarun Mata", at least with that spelling. Phil Bridger (talk) 12:52, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, I had the same problem, so I tried searching for the supposed founder, but no hits on that either. I'll wait to see if anyone can turn up any Hindi links, I don't have a Hindi keyboard, so I can't type, and Google doesn't let me translate "Sarun" to Hindi for me to search for the entire string in Hindi. -SpacemanSpiff (talk) 18:22, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

*Note I've placed a notice about this discussion at Wikipedia talk:Hinduism-related topics notice board and User talk:Shyam (Shyam is an active user who speaks Hindi). Thryduulf (talk) 21:44, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete without prejudice. Notability neither claimed nor established. If reliable sources giving notability can be found then there is nothing in this article that could not be easily recreated from them. Thryduulf (talk) 21:44, 12 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete I found the temple's website but it contains no pertinent information besides the vague claim that it "is very old temple situated in Kaotputli". All I could make out was that it celebrated seventh year festivities recently and that a dharmashala (approx., guest house) is being constructed (see artistic rendition). Google search in both English and Hindi found no other reliable source. All in all, nothing to suggest notability. Abecedare (talk) 01:24, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions.  -- Abecedare (talk) 01:30, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Temporarily keep, it's not necessary that you will find good number of online resources for notable temples in India. Tomar Rajputs article mentions one-liner info about the temple. I have left the message on the article's talk page. If anyone does not respond within next 10 days, then I doubt the temple's notability and should be deleted. Shyam  ( T / C ) 03:40, 13 June 2009 (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.