Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sree Andalurkavu


 * 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The result was   Speedy keep – nomination withdrawn (non-admin closure). — Snigbrook 01:53, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Sree Andalurkavu

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

I haven't found evidence that the subect of the article "has received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject", hence I believe the article does not pass WP:Notability. In fact, I could gather no regular, News, or Books Ghits for the subject. A source has been noted on the article, but I suspect it could (though I can't be sure, since I do not understand the language it is written in) not be independent of the subject. Allventon (talk) 15:42, 15 February 2009 (UTC) Also, I have been informed that a precedent may have been set whereby places of religious worship are notable. If that is the case, I believe the lack of reliable sources to verify the article means that the article does not meet WP:Verifiability. Allventon (talk) 17:59, 15 February 2009 (UTC) Keep or possible Merge/Redirect to Dharmadam (???) It appears the temple is in Dharmadam...is this correct? I found it mentioned in these two sources too: and. Esoteric to a westerner? Yes, but I am getting the impression that it is notable in the global scheme of things and should stay. Here's another link that's probably not the most reliable source but does call it "one of the very famous Kaavus in northern Kerala": ; the same site seems to have a lot of videos of the place and would be good to add in external links. Also...at the very least we should merge/redirect instead of deleting. Cazort (talk) 19:28, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep There are some references to the temple - if you search without the word 'sree' (holy or respected). One is at http://tripatlas.com/Dharmadam and there are others. I must confess to being mystified by the http://andalurkavu.com/ site. I would think it's a home site for the temple. It's in Malayalam, but I can't really see how it works anyway. May not be complete yet, or designed for IE only. (I'm not going into IE to try this out.) It's as notable as many of the articles on small Christian churches that survive - possibly more. We could do with a Malayalam reader checking out the temple's site. Peridon (talk) 16:31, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment http://tripatlas.com/Dharmadam is a mirror of a Wikipedia article, as noted by the disclaimer on the website: "This article provided by Wikipedia." As a result, I do not believe the assertion on the website that the temple is "a famous temple in Dharmadam ,during the festival of this Temple thousands of people used to make their devotions from different parts of Kannur and Calicut District" can be considered reliable.  Thank you for showing that "Sree" was not needed in a Google search; I didn't realize that.  I could only find 5 other Ghits beside this website using the word "Andalurkavu", 4 of which are restricted photos for me, and 1 a PDF document I am having trouble accessing for some reason.  With regards to churches surviving AFD, I am afraid I wasn't aware of that precedent, so I am willing to dismiss my argument that the article should be deleted per WP:N.  However, I believe that the lack of reliable sources to verify the subject of the article means that the article could be deleted per WP:V.  Allventon (talk) 17:12, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Response I didn't notice that that was a mirror. I can get into the pdf, but if you can't, try the 'open as HTML' option (doing it this way enables using 'Find in this page' which doesn't work on pdf's. This is Firefox - don't know if IE does it.). It's on page three - refers to a sacred grove and the ecological value of these groves. Probably the grove is associated with the temple. Hard to tell. The churches survive SD rather than AfD and aren't worth pursuing further, it seems. 'Because something else exists' isn't actually a Wikipedia criterion in practice - that was more of a comment from me! Wait and see time now, I think. No-one else may come in, or there might be a queue. Peridon (talk) 17:32, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Thank you very much for your advice on how to open the page; I have done so now. As you have said, the PDF doesn't directly refer to a temple; instead, it says with regards to Andalurkavu that it is one of a number of "sacred groves of northern Kerala".  I do not believe this verifies the article on the temple.  "Wait and see time now, I think."  Agreed.  Allventon (talk) 17:58, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.   —  Salih  ( talk ) 19:37, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Thank you for the links. From what I can tell, the temple is in Dharmadam.  With regards to the first link you've provided, I am having trouble accessing PDFs for whatever reason atm, so I can't comment on that source.  Regarding the second, I couldn't find any mention of "Andalurkavu" on that website; is the mention on the PDF linked to on that website?  As for the third, I do not believe it is reliable.  I am open to a merge with Dharmadam.  Allventon (talk) 19:39, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions.   --  fr33k  man   -s-  15:48, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Searching for or  gives several seemingly relevant hits; I haven't looked through them yet to see if they are enough to establish notability, but it would be good if we can keep the AFD open till someone has looked into this. Abecedare (talk) 16:20, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Also note the number of Google Book hits for Andalur Temple. I think it should be easy to establish notability. Abecedare (talk) 16:23, 16 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep. The Google Books hits found by Abecedare demonstrate notability. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:31, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Nomination withdrawn I agree that the GBooks hits prove notability. Thanks Abecedare.  Allventon (talk) 19:32, 17 February 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.