Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yogi Ramsuratkumar


 * 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 The case for non-notability has not been madeMike Cline (talk) 02:24, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Yogi Ramsuratkumar
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •   )

Person is not sufficiently notable and sources are not found to support material of the article or supposed notability. Wikid as&#169; 08:16, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:53, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Looks like it passes notability criteria.TheRingess (talk) 01:32, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment. It would be helpful if the nominator could explain how the books listed under "further reading" in the article, along with the other sources found by the Google Books and News archive searches linked above, are not sufficient for notability. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:38, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. Much as i dislike godmen, i have to admit this one was a fairly well known "swamiji" in my state. Here are a few Tamil links to show coverage in offline and online print media. (use tamil search term யோகி ராம்சுரத்குமார்). a 2001 book by Ontario Hindu conference, a video report in dinamalar, a 2001 article on his declining health, an anniversary celebration report in dinamalar, a 2009 article in Dinamani about a function in his ashram, an article on him in Ananda Vikatan (behind paywall)--Sodabottle (talk) 14:54, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I am still not conviced that these proove notability. It just proves that he existed, not that he is notable sufficiently to be included in Wikipedia. What about being a Yogi makes one notable? There are hundreds if not thousands of people like that without any notability. Is he notable for an event? Has he recieved an award? Has he been called a leader of some notable organisation? What is notable again? Wikid as&#169; 22:09, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
 * None of those questions is relevant. Notability, in Wikipedia terms, means having significant coverage in independent reliable sources. If you want to claim that this subject is not Wikipedia-notable then please explain how the books listed in the article and the sources identified above fail to meet this requirement. Phil Bridger (talk) 23:49, 7 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Phil, you are wrong that none of the above is relevant. The policy for notability for all biographies is WP:BIO. This particular individual does not fit under any of the list below:


 * 2.2 Academics
 * 2.3 Athletes
 * 2.4 Creative professionals
 * 2.5 Criminals and crime victims
 * 2.6 Diplomats
 * 2.7 Entertainers
 * 2.8 Politicians


 * Thus WP:ANYBIO applies. The question should be asked if this person has recived a notable award or honor, or has been nominated for one several times? In not he fails first criteria. The second question to be asked if this person has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in his or her specific field? To both of these we have a negative answer. The sources quoted are largely self published and do not support any criteria for inclusion under WP:ANYBIO. Not he has a significant coverage in independent  reliable sources, to support any of the other categories of WP:BIO.  Wikid as&#169; 00:08, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Read up a bit in WP:BIO to WP:BASIC. Subjects who pass that are notable, with no need to look at any other criteria. Phil Bridger (talk) 00:26, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Any of the listed factually self published sources be considered reliable or intellectually independent or independent of the subject? I can not see any established or reliable publisher who published his works or has any of the established reliable publishers published his biography or has he be mentioned in many different sources of the same quality? Hohm Press is obviously not such a publisher and clearly not intellectually independent. Any review of his publications been published in a pier reviewed journal by a notable academic or a historian? Any modern history of philosophy mentions him at least in passing? No.  Wikid as&#169; 01:08, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
 * "Not he has a significant coverage in independent reliable sources,". The media outlet links i have provided Dinamalar, Dina Mani and Ananda Vikatan are the biggest selling Tamil newspapers/magazines with circulations over half a million. Since subject died in 2001 and most of the Tamil archives in internet begin only with 2001 we don't see that many online links here. But coverage in independent reliable sources was there (i remember reading about him all the time in the newspapers). That said, the biographical details are unverifiable, as they all stem from either the yogi's organisation itself or his devotees. Most of the news/magazine articles would be more about "the yogi spoke about this", "the yogi was attending such and such event", "the yogi gave such and such advice", "the yogi comes to town X" and less about the yogi himself. In short, i believe he can meet WP:BIO through WP:GNG, but do not believe that we will be able to build more than a stub using the coverage in independent RS.--Sodabottle (talk) 04:20, 8 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep. Article meets notability criteria.Sardaka (talk) 09:53, 8 March 2010 (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.