Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thomas Kuzhinapurath


 * 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.  Sandstein  17:15, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Thomas Kuzhinapurath

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

Non-notable priest. Practically all references document trivial aspects of his career. Original editor's name indicates auto-biography. VG &#x260E; 20:01, 21 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  22:02, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  22:02, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:01, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


 * delete on first appearance it seems like this is a well referenced article but really it's all trivial or all seems to come from organisations that he has a personal connection with. I don't see anything that represent true independent notable 3rd party coverage. --Cameron Scott (talk) 20:05, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NB and WP:BIO cf38  talk  21:17, 21 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete He has a minor role in his church, and minor writings only--and not all that many of them either. Should he become a bishop, not just notary to a bishop, then he'd be notable. DGG (talk) 01:02, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per DGG, minor role otherwise known as non-notable. JBsupreme (talk) 06:24, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep He is rendering an important service as an expert of CCEO. He was invited to the Episcopal Synod of the Syro-Malankara Catholic Church as an expert of Oriental Canon Law.Simon Cheakkanal (talk) 08:49, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Neither of those have any relevance here. To warrant a biographical article, a living person's life must have already been reliably, independently, and extensively documented outside of Wikipedia.  You have not cited a single source to show this. Uncle G (talk) 16:44, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep He is notable just because he is a writer but he is a social worker who is rendering a praiseworthy service among the cancer patients. Being an expert in Canon Law he has contributed greatly to the Syro-Malankara Catholic Church. In 1998 he has argued in his writings that the Metropolitan status of the Syro-Malnkara Catholic Church is incompatible with its jurisdictional history and in 2005 the Syro-Malnkara Catholic Church was elavated to the status of a Major Archiepiscopal Church. He is the Notary of the Major Archiepiscopal Tribunal and not of any bishop. He is the authorised signatory. He is also working as judge of other tribunals of the Church. I have watched a programme on Fr. Thomas Kuzhinapurath in the Power Vision TV channel. This programme very clearly affirms the statements I made here.Wiproman (talk) 09:40, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * — Wiproman (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * you understand that personal testimony means absolutely nothing here? --Cameron Scott (talk) 10:31, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete Non-notable -- GP Pande  talk!  10:30, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I have done a research on the basis of the writings of Fr. Thomas Kuzhinapurath in connection with my Bth Thesis. I could find the following works written by Fr. Thomas Kuzhinapurath in the Library of St. Mary's Malankara Seminary and Public Library, Trivandrum:


 * KUZHINAPURATH, Thomas, Towards the Absolute: A Comparative Study the Evolutionary Theories Teilhard and Aurobindo, Trivandrum, 1991.
 * KUZHINAPURATH, Thomas, "Vadikapaisheelanam Ghattangaliloode", Christava Kahalam, 1991 April, pp. 9-14.
 * KUZHINAPURATH, Thomas, "Idavaka, Daivajanakendram", Preshithakeralam, 1991 December, pp. 21-28.
 * KUZHINAPURATH, Thomas, "Dhanikarkku Daivarajyam Anyamo", Talent, August 1992, pp. 32-40.
 * KUZHINAPURATH, Thomas, "Manushyajeevanuvendi Oru Dharmasamaram", Talent, November 1994, pp. 23-35.
 * KUZHINAPURATH, Thomas, "Manushya Manasakshiyodu Sabha Samsarikkunnu", Talent, January 1994, pp. 18-27.
 * KUZHINAPURATH, Thomas, "Sabhayude Samoohika Prabodhanangal", Christava Kahalam, 1991 August, pp. 21-34.
 * KUZHINAPURATH, Thomas, "Christmas Chinthakal: Karl Rahner", Christava Kahalam, 1993 December, pp. 14-27.
 * KUZHINAPURATH, Thomas, "Mar Gregorios Chinthakal", Christava Kahalam, 1994 January, pp. 9-17.
 * KUZHINAPURATH, Thomas, "Kaumarathile Kuttavasana: Oru Padhanam", Mathavum Chinthayum, 1992 May-June, pp. 43-62.
 * KUZHINAPURATH, Thomas, "Prapancha Parinaamam Udhithanaya Christuvilekku: Teilhard Chardin", Mathavum Chinthayum, 1995 March-April, pp. 17-31.
 * KUZHINAPURATH, Thomas, "Palam Thettunna Kaumaram", Vjnjanakairali, 1997 October, pp. 42-51.
 * KUZHINAPURATH, Thomas, "Mar Ivanios: Bharatha Christava Sanyasathinte Pravachakan", Deepika, 1997 July, 15 (Editorial Page).
 * KUZHINAPURATH, Thomas, "Malankara Katholikkasabhayude Kanonika Vyakthithvam", Aikyadeepam, 1993 September, pp.9-14.
 * KUZHINAPURATH, Thomas, "Ecological Problem: A Problem of Justice", Caritas, 1992, pp.63-78.
 * KUZHINAPURATH, Thomas, "Divine Soniship in the Gospel of John", Caritas, 1994, pp. 18-24.
 * KUZHINAPURATH, Thomas, The Existential Christology of Karl Rahner, Aluva, 1994.
 * KUZHINAPURATH, Thomas, Daivajanam, Trivandrum, 1998, 2000.
 * KUZHINAPURATH, Thomas, Salvific Law, Coimbatore, 2004; Trivandrum, 2008.
 * So the article shall be kept. Davis Mathews (talk) 15:14, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * — Davis_Mathews (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * most of those are not notable (Mathavum Chinthayum seems to be a student magazine that he was editor of) and the couple that are make a trivial mention in keeping with his station as a priest. Nothing special from a wikipedia point of view. I have to ask what's going on here in regards to this and a small group of articles, we seem have an awful lots of Single purpose accounts all making edits to the same three or four articles and AFDs. New accounts seem to be popping up to !vote in Afd. --Cameron Scott (talk) 15:30, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Works by the subject don't count. It's works about the subject that are needed in order to show that a biographical article of a living person that satisfies our content policies can be written. Uncle G (talk) 16:44, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * weak delete. The relentless deletion stance of Cameron Scott first prompted a pro-life reaction, but, on the second thought, the article does not persuade enough that his writings are notable, or that he is an important cleric withing his church. But neither was Mother Theresa. So the reviewing admin should give it a week's chance to improve (why not?) before pressing the button. NVO (talk) 18:51, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Well an AFD runs for five days - any reason why RS couldn't be added in that period? But neither was Mother Theresa. eh? that would be Mother Theresa who had 100s of books written about her and thousands of magazine and news articles in every single major newspaper around the word? --Cameron Scott (talk) 18:53, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. Smacks of self publicity.  A doctoral thesis and one essay now included in the syllabus are not enough for WP:N.  Springnuts (talk) 20:41, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete I'm a sysop from ml wiki. We recently had the same article for AfD discussion. The decision was to Delete, as the ml wiki editors did not find the person notable enough to be included in wikipedia. Wiproman was a one time use account created in ml wiki and we had blocked the id for flaming the discussion. The User Davis Mathews was also created around the same time, but did not participate in the AfD Discussion. Simon has claimed there that he is from the same family and he took the id of kuzhinappurath first and then created his own, as he felt that the name of the article would cause a COI issue. He also claims that he passed on the id and password of that account to the person in article himself. Then again, we see this. All these lead me to vote for a delete. Thanks. --Jyothis (talk) 22:40, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak keep -- seems to have minor notability. However, I have a concern that there may be some conflict of interest, and that this may be semi-autobiographic, if not acually so: if so, it would point to a weak delete.  Peterkingiron (talk) 00:27, 23 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment I have enquired about Mathavum Chinthayum. It is a theologico-philosophical bimonthly. Grreat personalities like Justice V. R. Krishna Iyer, a former Judge of the Supreme Court of India have contributed articles to this journal. It is not a students' Magazine. Bishop Thomas Chakkiyath was its Chief Editor when he was a professor in St. Joseph's Pontifical Institute, Aluva. Fr. Thomas Kuzhinapurath may be the chief editor from the part of the students. About other publications I got the following details: Vjnanakairali is the official organ of the Kerala Language Institute, an agency of Kerala government. The Kerala University whose Chancellor is the Governor of Kerala State has published one one of the essays of Fr. Thomas Kuzhinapurath (See, Fr. Thomas Kuzhinapurath, "Palam Thettunna Kaumaram", Bhashathilakam Kerala University Press, ISBN-81-86397-13-2,1998, pp. 146-154.). The University affirms in the introduction of the essay that Fr. Thomas the Chancellor of the Archdiocese of Trivandrum has contributed a number of essays of essays on various socio-ethical subjects and that he is the author of the book Daivajanam (Bhashathilakam Kerala University Press, ISBN-81-86397-13-2,1998, p. 146). Power Vision TV owned by Protestant Management has telecastes a programme on the litrary and social contributions of Fr. Thomas Kuzhinapurath.Simon Cheakkanal (talk) 02:55, 23 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment All India Radio Trivandrum has recently broadcasted a discussion on one of the essays of Fr. Thomas Kuzhinapurath in its Educational Programme. Simon Cheakkanal (talk) 03:29, 23 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. Reasons are WP:NB, WP:BIO and self publicity. There are a group of users or puppets/meat puppets of kuzhinappuram family members who are behind all the Kuzhinappuram articles. Their aim might be to start a kuzhinappuram portal in English wikipedia.  :)


 * The following articles are created by this group in English wikipedia.
 * Thomas Kuzhinapurath - I think this is the master article.
 * John Kuzhinapurath
 * Kuzhinapurath Family
 * Salvific Law
 * Daivajanam
 * The user who had created Thomas Kuzhinapurath had created the same article in Malayalam Wikipedia also. We have deleted the article from Malayalam Wikipedia after a long discussion. The discussion regarding the deletion of the article is available here. The users who have voted in favor of this article have participated in discussions there also. I have strong doubt whether these users are puppets/meat puppets of one user.


 * Moreover the below edits are just ridiculous.


 * Law_and_Gospel
 * Salvation
 * Canon_law
 * Veritatis_Splendor


 * and, this was too much.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shijualex (talk • contribs) 06:47, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

--Shijualex (talk) 04:53, 23 October 2008 (UTC)


 * CommentI have contributed to a lot of articles. This can be very well seen in my contributions page. It is I who created the pages such as Manjanikkara Dayara, Rektha Kanda Swamy Temple and a lot. Simon Cheakkanal (talk) 06:26, 23 October 2008 (UTC)


 * NOTE: There are more articles that are created by this group and needs investigation regarding the notability.


 * Thomas Naickamparambil
 * George Karakunnel
 * George Nedungatt
 * M S Publications


 * --Shijualex (talk) 07:01, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

The QDOS profile of Fr. Thomas Kuzhinapurath shows that he is having 11346th rank of 67104 profiles. Ref..Simon Cheakkanal (talk) 12:15, 23 October 2008 (UTC)


 * means absolutely nothing. This isn't a popularity contest. --Cameron Scott (talk) 12:24, 23 October 2008 (UTC)


 * The QDOS citation makes me feel a little too suspicious about the intention/credibility of this/these author(s). The higher QDOS profile rank seems to result from Wikipedia citation. Is this author trying to make a circular reference and fool all of us? --Jacob.jose (talk) 04:10, 24 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. Of the long list given above, the only mainstream publication is Deepika. Add Philip Chempakassery to Shiju's list. Tintin 12:49, 23 October 2008 (UTC)


 * CommentWritings concerned with theological and spiritual subjects appear in theological journals and Religious Magazines. But I think Vijnanakairali is also a mainstream journal published by Kerala Language Institute. Simon Cheakkanal (talk) 15:18, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

The official website of the Syro-Malnkara Catholic Church praises Fr. Thomas Kuzhinapurath's book Salvific Law.Ref. .Simon Cheakkanal (talk) 14:01, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
 * The people who published it.... --Cameron Scott (talk) 14:18, 23 October 2008 (UTC)


 * *CommentThe Holy See of Rome gave a destinguished recognition for Fr. Thomas Kuzhinapurath's work Salvific Law (Monsignor Gabriele Caccia, Letter to The Reverend Thomas Kuzhinapurath, dated September 23, 2008, Secreteriate of State, First Section, General Affairs). The official News Paper of the Holy See, L'Osservatore Romano (Indian Edition) has published a review on  Salvific Law  (Dr.Daniel G. Fulton, Book Review, L'Osservatore Romano, (Malayalam Edition Supplement) 1/21 (2008) p.vi.). The books Fr. Thomas Kuzhinapurath were found in the following libraries:   Ref.: www.unigre.it/English/Library/Catalogue/Author/Kuzhinapurath (Pontifical Gregorian University, Rome), www.pio.urbe.it/English/Library/Opac/Author/Kuzhinapurath (Pontifical Oriental Institute, Rome). Among these Daivajanam (People of God) (Carmel Publishing Centre,  Trivandrum, 2000, ISBN 81-87655-13-5) was reviewed by the following reviewers:
 * 1. Dr. Geevarghese Panicker, "Jeevitha Sparshiyaya Daivasasthram" (Lifebound Theology) in Aikyadeepam, July 1998, p.34.
 * 2. M.V. Thomas, "Daivajana Jeevithathinte Vilayiruthal" (An Evaluation of People of God's Life) in Deepika, July 26, 1998.
 * 3. Daniel Poovannathil, "Uthamamaya Vayananubhavam" (A Real Reading Experience), in Christava Kahalam, March 2002, p.58.

And Salvific Law (M.S. Publications, Trivandrum, 2008) was reviewed by:
 * 1. Dr. Daniel G. Fulton, "Book Review", L'Osservatore Romano, (Malayalam Edition Supplement) 1/21 (2008) p.vi.
 * 2. Philip Chempakassery, "Book Review", Aikya Samiksha, 4/2,2007.Simon Cheakkanal (talk) 15:09, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
 * *Aikya Samiksha is the in-house journal of his church who also happen to be his publishers. It say nothing about notability. --Cameron Scott (talk) 16:31, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Aikya Samiksha is the official theological journal of the Malnkara Seminary. It has a readership of around 5000 (Selected Theologically Educated). It publishes only well studied theological articles and Book Reviews. Ref. "Editorial Guidelines", Aikya Samiksha, 4/2,2007. Simon Cheakkanal (talk) 11:50, 25 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment. His two books are only held by one library in the US., . VG &#x260E; 10:08, 24 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. It was surprising to see how this article survived its first AFD discussion. Most of the references given in the article are associated directly or indirectly with the subject himself. The intentions of Thomas Kuzhinappurathu and most of the defenders of this article are clear-Self Publicity. Majority of the articles created and edited by them are best examples of "Wiki cronyism" :). Speedy deletion Manjithkaini (talk) 14:59, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete As per Jyothis and Shijualex. Salih  ( talk ) 08:02, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

The equal representation from different communities in responding to a single article looks interesting. Simon Cheakkanal (talk) 12:04, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
 * This can be interpreted as "poisoning the well", and considering the worldwide reach of Wikipedia, it would be unbecoming for one editor to even hint at the racial, ethnic, nationality, or similar composition of another and the possible implications of an influence in their analysis and disposition. Assume good faith. B.Wind (talk) 04:33, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Massive self-promoting delete - this is one of the most blatant self-promotions that I have seen on Wikipedia. He wrote his autobiography (those who have been invited here by Mr. Kuzhinapurath or other members of his church, please note WP:AUTO). Remove all sources connected to him, either directly or indirectly, and there would be nothing left to show that he would be notable under WP:BIO. To meet the notability bar, there must be something from reliable sources (as Wikipedia defines the term) to verify his notability... and I must add that the reliable sources must be clearly without connection with him or his church. Even then, autobiographies tend to be hastily deleted a Wikipedia as the author of an autobiography has a conflict of interest. B.Wind (talk) 04:51, 26 October 2008 (UTC)


 * CommentEnough reliable sources are mentioned above. I have proved that it is not an autobiography. Simon Cheakkanal (talk) 05:18, 26 October 2008 (UTC)#
 * Delete I'm sure he's a nice guy doing good things, but he isn't notable by WP standards. I think we also need to look into the possibility of sockpuppets here given some of the comments above Doug Weller (talk) 15:26, 26 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment Fr. Thomas Kuzhinapurath was the subject of reliable published secondary sources WP standars as per the comments given above. The news of release of Fr. Thomas' book Salvific Law was published in all important news papers in Kerala. SeeMalayala Manorama, May 14, 2008; Deepika, May 15, 2008; Mathrubhumi May 15, 2008. Simon Cheakkanal (talk) 16:24, 26 October 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.