Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shata shloki Ramayana


 * 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.   Wifione    .......  Leave a message  08:36, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Shata shloki Ramayana

 * – ( View AfD View log )

This looks purely promotional, and I note that a link to the YouTube video is being added to other articles. I can find no sources to suggest notability. Probably eligible for speedy deletion but I'm being conservative. Dougweller (talk) 09:10, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 16:36, 23 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Speedy-Delete as above. Possible work of the You tube Swami. Non-notable. No RS found. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 17:36, 23 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Speedy - Keep : Shata Shloki Ramayan is an ancient Hindu epic. I have added relevant citations and added further info. The article is not at all a promotional thing. Pl look in to article again before making further comments.Jethwarp (talk) 05:40, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment The sources are Ganapathi Sachchidananda's website, not a reliable source for the claim this is written by Valmiki or in the Ramayana. If reliable sources can be found for this then it should be included in those articles, but not as a separate article. Odd that it isn't mentioned in Google Books or Google Scholar at all, and only 354 hits on Google if is really part of the Ramayana. I note that I've found at least one IP today linking the YouTube video to an article. Dougweller (talk) 07:20, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
 * It should be noted all references are linked to a "Sri Swamiji". No other Hindu guru/swami or even scholar seems to know of this work of Valmiki. Sri Swamiji has written a Gujarati and English book on the same. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 10:21, 25 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete: lack of reliable sources on the topic, or any of the claims made (here or in the article) about it. HrafnTalkStalk(P) 06:55, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Ism schism (talk) 02:13, 30 August 2011 (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.