Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shree Maa


 * 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.  No prejudice against recreation if actual reliable''' sources are found. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:46, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Shree Maa

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Tagged unreferenced since July 2007. Notability is not supported by independed good reliable sources. Wikid as&#169; 08:58, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  —Vejvančický (talk) 11:54, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions.  —Vejvančický (talk) 11:54, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep its hard to tell exactly how notable this person/organization is from their website, but they do have numerous tv broadcasts (though probably local cable access channels), and some coverage in media. I have added (very poorly formatted, im not in the mood right now to do better layout, sorry) some external links to help people determine notability. I do believe she is a genuine saintly person with a significant international following. she seems to have been mentioned in a number of books. i dont see any info on where they are located or how large their ashram is, if they have one in fact. I would say keep pending better refs, and of course a rewrite or reduction to a stub article.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 05:12, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete There are simply no sources besides her own associates and promotional ads in the newspapers, anyone can do those broadcasts and international following is not a measure. (User) Mb (Talk) 12:39, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
 * well, unfortunately, i have to agree, despite my argument above. if no one who is more familiar with the subject can provide sources beyond the subjects primary sources, i would have to agree with deletion, even though i strongly suspect the subject is in fact notable within her field of influence (hindu spirituality, etc). i couldnt find enough sources myself. i will not canvass this, per WP conventions. of course, considering the content here is unsourced, it could be easily recreated from scratch if found to be notable.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 03:59, 6 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep I lean towards keeping articles which likely have sources in South Asian books not accessible to the majority of Wiki editors. Shii (tock) 18:40, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
 * If there are sources, post them here, othewise your reason does not contribute towards the consensus - verifability is the basis and independent good reliable sources is the key for notability. Wikid as&#169; 22:04, 7 March 2010 (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.