Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vedic Ashram


 * 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  06:37, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Vedic Ashram

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable organisation. Clear cut and paste. The Banner talk 17:38, 30 June 2016 (UTC)


 * I have a strong feeling (but no proof) that is AfD is related to Articles for deletion/Vedic Institute of Canada. The Banner talk 20:00, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. North America1000 07:49, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. North America1000 07:49, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. North America1000 07:50, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:49, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

added better content and explanations.


 * SNOW delete This clearly is a re-creation of the previously deleted article on the the Vedic Institute of Canada, and it suffers from the exact same deficiencies: absolutely zero sources to establish the notability of the group and garbled content in broken English that is just barely unintelligible enough to demonstrate that it is a blatantly promotional sales pitch for the business, utterly lacking is encyclopedic information or tone. Two of the four sources provided are non-RS webpages attached to the business and the other two have absolutely no relation to the topic of this article.


 * The authors of this article clearly hoped that they could copy and paste their previously deleted advert article and then fly it under the radar by sticking two actual notable terms ("vedic" and "ashram") together to create a notable-sounding topic. But this article is clearly not about either Vedic traditions broadly, nor about ashrams or monasticism, as is clear by the second line of the lead through every other word of the article, which is essentially a replication of a business webpage, violating numerous content policies.  This one is a no-brainer, and at this point it may be necessary to start looking at the behaviour of the authors of this content, who clearly either do not understand or do not care to respect Wikipedia's policies regarding promotional materials and notability requirements.  S n o w  let's rap 22:23, 9 July 2016 (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.