Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Science and Religion (book)


 * 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. North America1000 02:02, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Science and Religion (book)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

The article has a link to the book as its only source. I've found it hard to find secondary coverage online. If one searches for the book's name together with its author's, some results appear though apparently nothing that would amount to significant coverage. So, the book doesn't meet WP:GNG and WP:NBOOK. Modussiccandi (talk) 11:05, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Modussiccandi (talk) 11:05, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. Modussiccandi (talk) 11:05, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Modussiccandi (talk) 11:05, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Modussiccandi (talk) 11:05, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

I think so the page should be kept because information on Jainism and Science has very less sources on internet.. in order to promote the information about Jainism and science to public it should be kept...Rishabh.rsd (talk) 11:16, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete fails WP:NBOOK. Whatever the intrinsic interest of the subject matter might be, Wikipedia isn't the place to write about books that haven't had a documentable influence elsewhere first. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 17:58, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. The topic of Jainism and science may be notable, but this book doesn't inherit that notability (WP:NOTINHERITED) and I can't find substantial coverage in places that Wikipedia would consider reliable. ReaderofthePack (formerly Tokyogirl79)  (｡◕‿◕｡)  05:32, 23 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete Barely any coverage(WP:NBOOK) the only source this page has from the book itself and its poorly written. Niger banda (talk) 08:53, 24 February 2021 (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.