Wikipedia talk:Deletion review/Archives/2016/June

Deletion Review
Sirs,This page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arvind_Iyer was nominated for Deletion in 2014 and the result consensus was Keep.However,the administrator is no longer active and I would like for this deletion to be reviewed by someone as in my opinion the subject of this page has low notability and the sources are not credible considering that most of them point to dead links.In my opinion the page needs to be deleted.Kindly review.thank You (Intelbot22 (talk) 07:40, 14 April 2016 (UTC))
 * the 2014 discussion had three policy-based keep !votes with no support for the deletion nomination. There was no way that would ever have been closed as anything but "keep." Dead links are not a reason to delete, and notability is not temporary. VQuakr (talk) 08:15, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
 * The requesting editor is a single-purpose account (with a non-conforming user name, impersonating a bot, although that may be unintentional) whose sole objective is, for some reason, to get the article deleted. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:51, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
 * If you look at the page history of Arvind Iyer you'll find a whole string of single purpose accounts that are obviously related to this one (compare their edits and edit summaries...), doing nothing but trying to downplay the subject of the article and/or getting the article deleted... Thomas.W talk 11:52, 17 April 2016 (UTC)


 * If it keeps up, do you think that it might be worthwhile to give it a semi-protect for a little while? Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  06:58, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
 * This article was recently deleted at Articles_for_deletion/Arvind_Iyer_%282nd_nomination%29. Given the discrepancy between that and this, please review. ~Hydronium~Hydroxide~(Talk)~ 11:22, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Hmm... my first inclination would be to leave it deleted since apparently Iyer e-mailed and specifically asked for the article to be deleted. He seems to only be known for one film (at least at first glance, given the sourcing in the article) so he doesn't seem to be so famous that we'd ignore a person's request to be removed from Wikipedia. It's possible that this account might have been Iyer or someone he knew arguing on his behalf. Still, it would be a very good idea for CorporateM to get Iyer to send OTRS a ticket verifying his identity and that he wants to vanish, just so we can say that we did verify that everything was on the up and up. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  11:31, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
 * What is the point to this comment? The article is currently deleted.  This project talk page isn't the place for discussing whether a deletion was proper.  Either file a real request for deletion review, or let the matter drop.  Robert McClenon (talk) 12:57, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
 * To clarify: In 2014 an AFD had a unanimous KEEP vote and was kept. In 2016, the second AFD had a unanimous DELETE vote and was deleted. No admin ever closed an AFD in a manner that was counter to consensus.  CorporateM (Talk) 13:30, 9 June 2016 (UTC)


 * I am with Robert McClenon on this one. This isn't the place to request a review. File a proper request for deletion review or let it go. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 14:05, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
 * No issue with the close as based on the AFD, and no dog in the fight. Just noticed the comments here suggesting a history of bad faith edits/noms of a page that should be retained (not considered at the AFD) but that was successfully deleted a month later. Probably should have written "confirm" rather than "review". ~Hydronium~Hydroxide~(Talk)~ 06:17, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Valid ref. links to undelete 'Anandmurti Gurumaa' page
This is the reference to the wikipedia page of "Anandmurti gurumaa" which has recently been deleted following the deletion debate at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Anandmurti_Gurumaa. I had requested to resume this page,in response to which I have been directed to contact (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion#anandmurti_gurumaa) and to this page via User:JJMC89 too. I would like to bring to your kind notice that the reason mentioned in the debate is lack of independent resources and dead links, whereas lot of sources and independent links exist featuring work of Anandmurti gurumaa as a renowned Indian spiritual master. Moreover these reliable links belong to national newspapers like Times of India, DNA, The Hindu, India today, Amar Ujala etc.

Below are the sources for your reference Tedx talk: (Times of India) Speaking tree: DNA Newspaper: The Hindu Newspaper: The Hindu: Amar Ujala Newspaper: Wikiquote: Verified Facebook page: Youtube channel: Wikipedia other pages reference: BBC News: Interview: BBC Interview: Interview: Red Fm Vancouver ( Canada) Interview: Interview: Gurumaa with swami ramdev in an event: MTV: Life positive: Life positive: 	" " Life positive: Life positive: Life positive: Life positive: Life positive: Official Website: Life positive: Life positive: Life positive: Life positive: Hungama: Life positive: Karmapa: Karmapa: Karmapa: 	" " Karmapa: Wikipedia page references: Wikipedia page references: Wikipedia page references: Wikipedia page references: Wikipedia page references: India Today Newspaper: PS: This information has also been posted to other admins of the debate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.94.116.18 (talk) 06:50, 7 June 2016 (UTC)


 * You would do well to strip out the YouTube/Wikipedia/Wikiquote/Facebook links then we can have a look at what is left. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 01:24, 8 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Here are the sources left after removing the aforementioned links:


 * Offhand I don't see where the coverage is really heavy or strong enough to overturn the prior AfD. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  04:53, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

I have worked on your feedback and have researched few primary sources on the internet. The page of the person 'Anandmurti Gurumaa' was around more than 10 years old but why that her page was deleted. The references shared by me are also considered on different wiki page for eg: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaggi_Vasudev#References I believe below references will help you to undelete the page.

1.	The Hindu Newspaper 2.	The Hindu 3.	Amar Ujala Newspaper

4.	Times of India Newspaper posted articles of anandmurti gurumaa to their blog ’Speaking tree’ 5.	Times of India Newspaper posted articles of anandmurti gurumaa to their blog ’Speaking tree’ 6.	Tedx talk 7.	Karmapa 8.	Article in DNA Newspaper 9.	Article in DNA Newspaper 10.	Article in DNA Newspaper 11.	Article in DNA Newspaper 12.	Article in DNA Newspaper 13.	Karmapa 14.	Karmapa 15.	Karmapa 16.	Life positive	 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.243.253.202 (talk) 14:37, 12 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Much of this is material written by Anandmurti Gurumaa and is not useful in demonstrating that she meets the inclusion criteria for an article in the encyclopedia. What is needed is significant coverage in independent and reliable sources. Who has written about Anandmurti Gurumaa in some detail in a source that has nothing to do with her, has editorial oversight and a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 15:12, 12 June 2016 (UTC)