Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Siddharameshwar Maharaj


 * 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   keep. Mango juice talk 14:10, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Siddharameshwar Maharaj

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

Self published references only. Notablity not established by article alone. Wikidās ॐ 19:12, 11 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Strong delete Non notable with no reliable sources. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 00:56, 12 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep in light of the deletion spree that and  are engaged in against Nisargadatta articles, all of which are notable, referenced, and well-established. The article references a book Prior to Consciousness, which is not self-published. Why the multple falsehoods in this nomination? There is an agenda at work here. &mdash; goethean &#2384; 13:43, 12 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete No evidence of notability provided by independent sources ... all sourcing seems to be from within the movement.Kww (talk) 14:16, 12 July 2008 (UTC)


 * STRONG KEEP Why would you want to delete this page? I've been watching it for some time and it is for the most part accurate and verifiable biographically. I believe that four or five people have contributed to the page. If you delete it someone will only have to come along and re-input what has already been written. Considering that Siddharameshwar Maharaj was virtually unknown in the west only two years ago, unlike Nisargadatta Maharaj who has been well known since the 70's, it seems like a good foundation to build on with the goal of better edits in the future. Some of biographical references come from books printed in limited runs in India. Those are certain to be added in the future, in the meantime, this page gives basic information about someone of whom there is a rising interest and should be let to evolve. There is no movement involved, there is just a growing group of people who share similar interests in the lineage of Nisargadatta Maharaj. Instead of voicing that pages should be deleted for personal motives, how about making positive contributions to the pages that you think should be deleted instead of only negative comments.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sadguru.us (talk • contribs) 14:41, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Reply Thank you for your first edit to wikipedia. I hope you enjoy editing. Per this discussion, the subject is not notable and has no reliable sources. First, his notability needs to be established. Then, reliable sources need to be found to back up these claims. Thanks and happy editing. Ism schism (talk) 14:46, 12 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Google books Google Scholar &mdash; goethean &#2384; 15:05, 12 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep Establishes notability, the book isn't a self published source. I'm also concerned about how the nominators have been nominating a large number of articles closely related to this for deletion, however that's not the issue here, it's notability, and I think the article establishes notability. Steve Crossin   (contact)  15:43, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Note - there is a doubt as to where notability is coming from. Is it a borrowed notability or has this subject be part of any study? Has any books or other encylopaedia articles written about him? Or was he mentioned in passing only. Wikidās ॐ 16:49, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Note This is an uninvestigated doubt that exists only in Wikidas' mind. There are dozens and dozens of books containing the teachings and biographical references to both Nisargadatta Maharaj and Siddharameshwar Maharaj. Before tagging an article for delete, it would be prudent to do some simple investigation such as a google search.


 *  Keep - There are sources available. Do some work and use the available sources to improved that article, rather than tag for deletion. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 17:44, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

This article is an important historical evidence for backing Nisargadatta who has changed number of lives. There are publications available on amazon that can be used for references. Contribution from Siddharamaeshwar maharaj are notable and his biography has to edited more than i thought should be more. Please leave this article in its place and avoid placing stamps of speedy deletion. I think this article is required.
 * DO NOT DELETE***

≈ bebrahmin ≈ 17:44, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions.   —John Z (talk) 06:23, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

The definition of what makes a topic notable for one person apparantly isn't the same as of what it means to an interested group of people. It also seems to detract from the richness of content if any given page has only one contributor. I think that knowledgeable people like to contribute as much as possible, but are not likely to become full time Wikipedia editors. It seems clear that there is ample support being voiced for letting this page stay and evolve. Perhaps the benevolent Wikidas could contribute some of his editing skill towards getting this page up to snuff instead of lobbying to have it deleted. I think many people would be appreciative. Sadguru.us (talk) 10:17, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep This discussion really draws into question the definition that one is using for notability. Siddharameshwar Maharaj was one of the great saints of the 20th Century and this is widely know in Maharashtra and Karnataka states in India. This is well documented in many texts that have been 'self-published' in India through small publishing houses. This is a very common method of printing books in India. This discussion also draws into question the standard of only using references from sources that are not self-published. Self publishing is the way of spreading information for the future, and the future is now. Credible sources should be the standard. Whether the source is self published or not is really irrelevent. The information presented on this page is fundamentally accurate. I have not posted the biographical information, but it is consistent with what I have been told by people who were involved with Siddharameshwar Maharaj and his descendents of the lineage. The Inchgiri branch of the Navnath Sampradaya has hundreds of thousands of descendent faithful devotees who meet once a year for a large festival to celebrate the dozens of spiritual master who have appeared in this lineage. Let the page stay. The documentation will continue to evolve as it has already done since it first appeared. One of the appealing things about Wikipedia is that anyone that is knowledgeable can come and edit and make corrections as required. This takes time. It seems that if would be a shame if the Wiki-Police stop the process of organic evolution of the pages by deleting them before they have had a chance to mature.


 * If these books were published through a small publishing house, unless it was a vanity press, it was probably not self-published. The word is frequently misused at Wikipedia.  What would be helpful would be more details, like the titles, the publishing houses, date of publication, etc.  These are frequently lacking, making it hard on people trying to save articles.  The more details the better.John Z (talk) 10:23, 13 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Agree. But the pages have to start somewhere. It takes time. If many pages are deleted in their infancy, they remain unavailable for people to work on them. Link provided by Goethean: Google books clearly shows notability. Sadguru.us (talk) 11:48, 13 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Commnet During this debate no independent third party reliable sources have been added to this article. As is, this article is still about a non notable and there are no reliable sources. It deserves a vote of Delete. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 02:08, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Sadguru.us (talk) 05:22, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Here is an independent third party named The Noble World Foundation who mentions both Nisargadatta and Siddharameshwar Maharaj in their book: http://www.nobleworld.org/great_personalities.htm

Sadguru.us (talk) 11:33, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Reliable Source an article published in Life Positive Magazine in 2007 about Ranjit Maharaj stating how he was a brother devotee of Nisargadatta Maharaj, the well-known advaita teacher whose book I am That has become a modern spiritual classic. The article makes extensive references to Siddharameshwar Maharaj and Nisargadatta Maharaj. http://www.lifepositive.com/Spirit/Guru/Ranjit_Maharaj_the_Stateless_State42004.asp

Sadguru.us (talk) 11:33, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
 * KEEP Ok already, it seems that there is concensus that this request to delete is groundless and that Siddharameshwar Maharaj has sufficient notability. Please remove the tagged for deletion notice. If you see some errors on the page, tag them for correction, from what I can see from the deletion policy, this is what should usually be done first before tagging a page for deletion. Let's move on, I'm sure that there are lots of other pages the editors could be submitting for deletion.

Strongly insist to Keep I have read book "Master of Self Realizaiton" by Siddharameshwar Maharaj. Without reading any one can say anthing about it. After reading I have found this book is specially for the spritual seekers who have reached various mile stones. Even after having reached to hegher levels how and where all places the mind gets stuck to are clearly mentioned in this book. The way outs are also guided so very well and that the seeker does not remain seeker after knowing the tricks to put mind at rest. Spritially advanced ones get to know - what is the true realization and how to understand it. The book is "completeness of spirituality" which is seldomly tought. Thanks. Shah 17:27, 14 July 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.197.25.11 (talk)

Comment The subject is not a notable one, and equally important, this discussion has gone on for 5 days and no Reliable sources have been added to the article. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 11:45, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Comment I hope the closing admin takes note of this, which shows sadguru.us adding a book published by Sadguru to the publication list. Kww (talk) 12:17, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Closing admin should also note that Shah does not exist and a fake signature was used by 203.197.25.11 on the comment headed: Strongly insist to Keep. Wikidās ॐ 12:29, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Wah, wah, wah... Please stop whining like a couple of school-children tattletales. If you see something you don't like tag it for correction. How about get a life! If you can't do that at least be productive and helpful in correcting errors instead of just wasting everyone's time. Closing admin should ban posts from these 'editors' on a deleting spree.

Delete - after looking over the above discussion, sadgurus remarks and anon comments, it appears that no sources were produced to comply with WP:NOTABILITY, even the 'defense' was also a form of self-advertisement by a single purpose accounts or fake accounts. Wikidās ॐ 12:34, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Keep per Goethean. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 05:41, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Bebrahmin 14:20 18 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Wikidās ॐ & Ism schism both users happen to be Indian pagans. These user are the one who are making request for deletion of articles. I am sure these users have developed a jealousy for the famous people outside their sect. If anyone sees the articles created by these users they all need AfDs. Either both the users have to be banned from editing wikipedia or they should adopt better way of projecting Hinduism. The only resistance i ever had editing wikipedia is from false Brahmins who consider themselves supreme all over others even Christians. Please take my comments in healthy spirit and edit wikipedia in proper manner.


 * Keep per sources given in the article and above, by goethean, sadguru's, esp last two, jossi. And per Kurt, though he hasn't commented here. :-)  Note that some of the works on  Siddharameshwar Maharaj were written, edited or prefaced by his student Nisargadatta Maharaj, who was so famous, so widely quoted, that he is a major authority  for notability. cf WP:CREATIVE.  See Nisargadatta Maharaj's AfD  for this - he was considered by a reliable source to be worthy of inclusion in a list of 20 of the most famous gurus (not just Hindu gurus) of the last century in the world. John Z (talk) 07:22, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

COMMENT About Abuse of Afd Nomination process by Wikidas and Ism schism These two editors are obviously on a campaign to delete any hindu related articles that are not affiliated with the ISKON Vaishnava cult. This is evidenced here in these selections from the Non notable hindu ashrams and gurus section of WikiProject Deletion sorting/Hinduism. []:


 * Comment Last week, I listed articles for deletion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Hinduism. In particular, I have looked for references for Bihariji Maharaj, Prabhu Jagatbandhu Sundar, Sindhi festivals and Swami Shankarananda Giri. To date, I have not found any. If anyone has any reliable sources or comments, please feel free to share or edit the articles. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 02:15, 22 June 2008 (UTC


 * Comment I listed more articles for deletion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Hinduism. Please review these articles and their discussion as many articles have had no comments for a week. I appreciate any comments or feedback. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 23:01, 28 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Note Four new Afds have been added to Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Hinduism. Please review. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 22:39, 1 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Note Four new Afds have been listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Hinduism. They are; I Am That: Talks with Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj, Navnath Sampradaya, Navnath, and Shri Madhavnath Maharaj. Please review. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 00:52, 12 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Note Six new Afds have been listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Hinduism. These are; Siddharam, Parampoojya Shri Kalavati Aai, Siddharudh Swami, Swami Pranavananda, Ma Jaya, and David Godman. Please review. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 15:10, 12 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Note Ten new Afds have been listed at, Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Religion. The articles are; Living Essence Foundation, Madhukar (author), Nancy Freeman Patchen, Swami Sundaranand, Linda Johnsen, Luc Venet, William McKay Aitken, Yogi Marlon, Anthony Fernandes, and Vaishnava Center for Enlightenment. Please review. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 00:49, 16 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Note Six new Afds have been listed at, Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Hinduism. These articles are; Lisa M. Wolfe, Tirtha and Kshetra, Shivom Tirth, Swami Vishnu Tirtha, Yogiraj Bharat Bhushan and Yoga Shri Pith. Please review. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 00:31, 17 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Note Six new Afds have been listed at, Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Hinduism. These articles are; Dhyanyogi Madhusudandas, Dileepji, Advance Party (religious movement), Oneness University, Oneness Blessing, and Kalki Bhagavan. Please review. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 00:50, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Given the shear number of Afds that these guys are generating(over 40 hindu related articles and counting in the past month) clearly show that there is some agenda at work here other than improving Wikipedia. They don't even make any positive comments, they only keep saying "delete-non notable." Admins should be alerted to the unscrupulous activities of these out of control editors and something should be done. Posted by Ram.samartha (talk) 22:37, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Comment There is no justification to keep multiple comments on this page from the same three people that only say "delete - Non notable," and "non reliable resources." These comments have been made in the beginning and their views need not be expressed repeatedly only saying the same thing; "delete, non notable, non reliable resources." It seems that the nominations for deletion were not made in good faith, as no positive help with editing the pages has been attempted by any of these editors, who instead choose to waste their own time and the time of others who have better things to do than spending their days scouring Wikipedia looking to delete any articles that they don't agree with. With the limited time that I have, I have tried to clean up some of the editing and references, but the page is a work in progress. There is clear notability to Siddharameshwar Maharaj, and the page will surely, if slowly be brought up to snuff. But thanks have to be given in that the threat of deletion by characters of questionable motives have inspired interested parties to make this a better article. Too bad they couldn't have helped in a positive fashion, but helping out with negativity is still a help, nonetheless. Except for KWW who feels like his incessant unnecessary comments and deletions do not add anything to the merit of this discussion. Ram.samartha 00:22, 19 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep definitely notable, article just needs work. ~ priyanath talk 15:21, 19 July 2008 (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.