Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thai Amulets


 * 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. Courcelles (talk) 01:14, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

Thai Amulets

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

There's no references found for this article, and so can't find any importance on Wikipedia. Josu4u (talk) 19:47, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. Unfortunately, there's just nothing to salvage here. The entire article is unverifiable and written in broken English. (comment by U:Non-dropframe)
 * Comment We do not delete articles merely because of poor English, if they can be improved by rewriting. I don't find the English all that awful--the main error is writing it's for its. Every individual sentence is understandable.  DGG ( talk ) 17:53, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. It cites absolutely no sources to indicate its notability, the structure/layout is completely off and it generally doesn't seem salvageable. I actually nominated this article for speedy deletion when it was even worse and had failed to notice that the original author just took it upon themselves to simply remove the speedy deletion tag...Rambunctious Racoon (talk) 23:25, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Since the article has been essentially re-written from the ground up, keeping it seems logical. Good job, Lerdsuwa! Rambunctious Racoon (talk) 20:24, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Thailand-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:16, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Buddhism-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:16, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep It is notable. See CNN Travel, Reuter , NY Times , Lonely Planet . Every Thai Buddhist has at least one of those: see this news related Thai Prime Minister . The language used in the article is not too bad and can be improved. --Lerdsuwa (talk) 15:32, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment: Subject is clearly notable, but I'm not sure the article as currently written is worth saving. Might as well rewrite it from scratch. --Paul_012 (talk) 17:59, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Actually, make that a keep. Just noticed that Lerdsuwa had done some major clean-up on the article. --Paul_012 (talk) 18:01, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 04:53, 8 September 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:21, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
 * This really shouldn't have been relisted a second time. Consensus has become rather clear; the only reasons given for deletion (lack of referencing, unverifiable and written in broken English) have been addressed. Pinging User:Josu4u and User:Non-dropframe, in case they have further arguments. --Paul_012 (talk) 04:26, 16 September 2015 (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.