809:, "A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has been the subject of published secondary source material which is reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject". "Primary sources may be used to support content in an article, but they do not contribute toward proving the notability of a subject".
891:
should be drafted for religious figures as well, i.e. they should somehow stand out amongst their peers. Being part of the highest level (under the top figure) of a religious hierarchy would qualify as the religious equivalent of "elected member of a highly selective and prestigious scholarly society
521:
I agree that traditional background by itself does not warrant notability. The combination of him being an ISKCON leader, guru, sannyasi and being from a traditional background does. The religious sources for the religious leaders can be considered as reliable sources. I certainly agree that academic
755:
Thank you, Erebus
Morgaine. I have added other references to the site, including The Tribune newspaper, Vaisnava Institute of Higher education and University paper among many other independent sources that mention him. Ideally the person would have been a subject of independent study, but since
802:. Please note that while the article has been made to look "well referenced" since its nomination for AfD, the references lead to trivial material used as primary source. Essentially links showing the subject to be scheduled for various events as part of his work.
756:
there are many sources that confirm the claims of notability, ie that he is guru and swami in ISKCON, it is a specialized field and only a few editors are expert in it. There is no lack of multiple sources that confirm the claim of notability. Also as with
639:
for the particular sect and who is and who is not notable in the religious group. Some areas of article may not be verifiable and need to be. It is not his work for organization that makes him notable, its his position in it.
863:. It's true that the subject is only coincidentally mentioned in sources outside of the religious hierarchy he belongs to. But he is verifiably (including according to 3rd party sources) part of that religious hierarchy. In
829:
we can state that improvements have worked out and can be reasonably assumed on future improvement, so no reason for AfD. You are trying to paint it as if the sources are published by the subject or primary. They are not.
506:
which states the subject must have significant coverage in secondary sources. Google scholar, news and books return zero results on either "Vedavyasa Priya
Maharaja" and "Vedavyasa Priya Swami" or even "Vedavyasa Priya"
461:
600:
it is presumed to be a suitable article topic." and is further clarified by: "Independent of the subject excludes works produced by those affiliated with the subject". Notability aside, the article also fails
731:
one. Since this article still has no secondary/tertiary (independant) sources (as per my comments above) and Google scholar/news/books come up with zero results, my initial statement of it failing
502:. Although the article has improved a bit, it still only has 4 sources 3 of those are from ISKCON, the other from a personal website, these are primary sources only. Therefore the article fails
428:- possibly a less notable, but still one of ISKCON swamis, but notable for being from a rather traditional background. Not too many sources in books... so the article should be shorten.
123:
407:
875:, even though most pages of that kind have no references other than Catholic ones. In the absence of any explicit notability guidelines regarding religious figures, this is a
609:. While i am sure this person does a lot of good work for his organization, that does not mean he meets the notability/verifiability threshold for inclusion into Knowledge.
455:
674:
295:
266:
635:
As you may note the sources are not the best, but are not primary, are independent from the subject and were in majority accepted as a reliable sources on
224:) 16:49, 19 September 2008 (UTC) Rewritten but even with it's condensed size like it is now, the quote still makes up the majority of the article.
90:
85:
94:
705:"Because policies take precedence over guidelines, in the case of an inconsistency between this page and that one, this page has priority, and
522:
sources should be added to the article and yes the sources of googlescholar and googlebook do not have any indexed material in
English on him.
498:
A traditional background does not make one notable enough for
Knowledge, also notability does not directly limit article content as stated in
77:
215:
It's been re-added, 95% of the article is now a quote from a I think that in this state the article would even qualify for a speedy
888:
673:
It was discussed a few times in principle. Obviously official site of ISKCON is reliable source for ISKCON related information:
571:
The sources quoted are not his personal site or a blog and are not under any control of the individual. Hope that clarifies it.
17:
476:
912:. Obviously, being the top figure in an non-notable religion shared by 5 people does not automatically make someone notable.
443:
533:
I am sorry, but sources not independent of the subject are not to be considered reliable. Third party sources are needed.
131:
183:
919:
899:
880:
855:
836:
820:
791:
766:
748:
682:
668:
646:
618:
577:
566:
544:
528:
516:
493:
419:
395:
379:
354:
331:
310:
284:
250:
233:
209:
170:
143:
59:
936:
744:
614:
512:
437:
229:
221:
139:
36:
935:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
887:'d here). Unless you want to delete 90% of the cardinals of course. Frankly, I think that something similar to
687:
It is not so obviously as you state, the page you refer to states (emphasis mine): "Membership in ISKCON would
81:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
916:
896:
851:
433:
73:
65:
913:
893:
596:
which clearly states (emphasis mine): "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources
279:
483:
786:
740:
610:
562:
508:
415:
375:
350:
327:
306:
246:
225:
217:
135:
469:
814:
662:
538:
389:
203:
190:
164:
727:
which you mention, does not mention that ISKCON is a secondary or tertiary source. Let alone an
760:, subjects website is a good source of material, in fact preferred one for contentious claims.
872:
716:
700:
606:
583:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
449:
273:
558:
411:
371:
346:
323:
302:
242:
908:
P.S.: My analogy assumes that the religion itself is notable, which seems to be the case
55:
884:
864:
826:
810:
806:
757:
658:
654:
636:
593:
534:
499:
385:
199:
186:
160:
156:
342:
832:
762:
724:
720:
706:
678:
642:
573:
524:
489:
184:
http://abhay001.wordpress.com/2008/08/11/his-holiness-vedavyasapriya-swami-maharaj/
384:
I'm not sure I see how that makes that person notable, any non trivial coverage ?
111:
780:
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
341:
The article needs a rewrite, but the subject of the article is notable. He is an
847:
736:
732:
712:
602:
503:
241:
I have reduce the quote and contextualized it in the "History" section. Thanks.
50:
691:
to be a substantial notability claim." however that is based solely on
909:
723:
which in turn, is a guideline). And even aside from all of this,
929:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
719:(an official Knowledge policy, which takes precedence over
711:
In my above comments I have shown that the article fails
118:
107:
103:
99:
468:
785:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
345:. I will add the reference to the article. Thanks.
408:list of Living people-related deletion discussions
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
939:). No further edits should be made to this page.
699:, I'd hardly call that consensus. Furthermore,
482:
296:list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions
267:list of Religion-related deletion discussions
8:
675:Reliable sources for ISKCON related articles
553:that person is notable in that organization
130:Non notable person, Google comes up with 60
582:The sources currently in the article are
549:Sources from an organization that state
294:: This debate has been included in the
265:: This debate has been included in the
406:: This debate has been included in the
592:sources. Therefore the article fails
7:
598:that are independent of the subject,
871:make him notable. But in practice
846:due to lack of secondary sources.
24:
362:Also, the proper name is usually
889:Knowledge:Notability_(academics)
709:should be updated accordingly."
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
920:19:32, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
900:02:59, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
856:21:04, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
837:20:37, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
821:11:13, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
792:10:38, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
767:10:20, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
749:01:43, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
683:00:13, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
669:22:12, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
647:19:30, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
619:15:32, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
578:13:54, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
567:12:35, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
545:12:30, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
529:11:19, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
517:10:47, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
494:07:21, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
420:00:02, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
396:17:10, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
380:14:16, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
355:14:09, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
332:01:27, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
311:01:23, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
285:00:27, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
251:17:11, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
234:17:26, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
210:12:32, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
196:07:42, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
171:18:23, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
144:15:23, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
60:04:16, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
1:
956:
873:every Catholic cardinal is
557:reliable sources. Thanks.
134:Article is also very POV.
879:guideline for inclusion (
932:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
657:are you refering to ?
368:Vedavyasa-priya Swami.
364:Vedavyasa Priya Swami,
343:ISKCON Swami (No. 81)
653:Which discussion on
588:sources and are not
74:Vedavyasapriya Swami
66:Vedavyasapriya Swami
881:WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS
322:per above. Thanks.
867:this alone should
44:The result was
892:or association".
819:
794:
667:
543:
422:
394:
313:
299:
287:
270:
208:
195:
169:
947:
934:
835:
813:
784:
782:
765:
681:
661:
645:
576:
537:
527:
492:
487:
486:
472:
402:
388:
300:
290:
282:
276:
271:
261:
202:
198:Been rewritten.
189:
182:also copyvio of
163:
121:
115:
97:
34:
955:
954:
950:
949:
948:
946:
945:
944:
943:
937:deletion review
930:
831:
778:
761:
741:Erebus Morgaine
677:
641:
611:Erebus Morgaine
572:
523:
509:Erebus Morgaine
488:
429:
280:
274:
226:Erebus Morgaine
218:Erebus Morgaine
136:Erebus Morgaine
117:
88:
72:
69:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
953:
951:
942:
941:
925:
924:
923:
922:
903:
902:
858:
841:
840:
839:
803:
796:
795:
783:
775:
774:
773:
772:
771:
770:
769:
752:
751:
739:still stands.
650:
649:
633:
632:
631:
630:
629:
628:
627:
626:
625:
624:
623:
622:
621:
423:
400:
399:
398:
357:
315:
314:
288:
258:
257:
256:
255:
254:
253:
174:
173:
128:
127:
68:
63:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
952:
940:
938:
933:
927:
926:
921:
918:
915:
911:
907:
906:
905:
904:
901:
898:
895:
890:
886:
882:
878:
874:
870:
866:
862:
859:
857:
853:
849:
845:
842:
838:
834:
828:
824:
823:
822:
818:
817:
812:
808:
804:
801:
798:
797:
793:
790:
789:
781:
777:
776:
768:
764:
759:
754:
753:
750:
746:
742:
738:
734:
730:
726:
722:
718:
714:
710:
708:
702:
698:
697:single editor
694:
690:
686:
685:
684:
680:
676:
672:
671:
670:
666:
665:
660:
656:
652:
651:
648:
644:
638:
634:
620:
616:
612:
608:
604:
603:verifiability
599:
595:
591:
587:
586:
581:
580:
579:
575:
570:
569:
568:
564:
560:
556:
552:
548:
547:
546:
542:
541:
536:
532:
531:
530:
526:
520:
519:
518:
514:
510:
505:
501:
497:
496:
495:
491:
485:
481:
478:
475:
471:
467:
463:
460:
457:
454:
451:
448:
445:
442:
439:
435:
432:
431:Find sources:
427:
424:
421:
417:
413:
409:
405:
401:
397:
393:
392:
387:
383:
382:
381:
377:
373:
369:
365:
361:
358:
356:
352:
348:
344:
340:
337:
336:
335:
334:
333:
329:
325:
321:
312:
308:
304:
297:
293:
289:
286:
283:
277:
268:
264:
260:
259:
252:
248:
244:
240:
237:
236:
235:
231:
227:
223:
219:
216:
213:
212:
211:
207:
206:
201:
197:
194:
193:
188:
185:
181:
176:
175:
172:
168:
167:
162:
158:
154:
152:
148:
147:
146:
145:
141:
137:
133:
125:
120:
113:
109:
105:
101:
96:
92:
87:
83:
79:
75:
71:
70:
67:
64:
62:
61:
57:
53:
52:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
931:
928:
876:
868:
860:
843:
815:
799:
787:
779:
728:
704:
696:
692:
688:
663:
607:this section
597:
589:
584:
554:
550:
539:
479:
473:
465:
458:
452:
446:
440:
430:
425:
403:
390:
367:
363:
359:
338:
319:
317:
316:
291:
262:
238:
214:
204:
191:
179:
177:
165:
150:
149:
129:
49:
46:no consensus
45:
43:
31:
28:
729:independent
693:one comment
605:especially
590:independent
456:free images
275:Fabrictramp
788:Black Kite
717:WP:SOURCES
701:WP:SOURCES
559:Ism schism
412:Erwin85Bot
372:Ism schism
347:Ism schism
324:Ism schism
303:Ism schism
281:talk to me
243:Ism schism
159:entirely.
833:Wikidās ॐ
825:Per same
763:Wikidās ॐ
679:Wikidās ॐ
643:Wikidās ॐ
574:Wikidās ॐ
525:Wikidās ॐ
490:Wikidās ॐ
877:de facto
811:Equendil
659:Equendil
535:Equendil
386:Equendil
370:Thanks.
200:Equendil
187:Equendil
161:Equendil
155:, fails
124:View log
800:Comment
703:states
585:primary
462:WP refs
450:scholar
360:Comment
91:protect
86:history
865:theory
848:Stifle
844:Delete
827:WP:BIO
807:WP:BIO
689:appear
655:WP:RSN
637:WP:RSN
594:WP:GNG
500:WP:NNC
434:Google
320:Delete
157:WP:BIO
153:delete
151:Speedy
119:delete
95:delete
883:gets
725:WP:RS
721:WP:RS
707:WP:RS
695:of a
477:JSTOR
438:books
239:Reply
122:) – (
112:views
104:watch
100:links
16:<
910:here
861:Keep
852:talk
816:Talk
805:Per
758:BLPs
745:talk
737:WP:V
735:and
733:WP:N
715:and
713:WP:V
664:Talk
615:talk
563:talk
540:Talk
513:talk
504:WP:N
470:FENS
444:news
426:Keep
416:talk
410:. --
404:Note
391:Talk
376:talk
351:talk
339:Keep
328:talk
307:talk
292:Note
263:Note
247:talk
230:talk
222:talk
205:Talk
192:Talk
180:Note
166:Talk
140:talk
132:hits
108:logs
82:talk
78:edit
56:talk
51:Cirt
885:IAR
869:not
555:are
551:how
484:TWL
366:or
298:.
272:--
269:.
914:VG
894:VG
854:)
747:)
617:)
565:)
515:)
464:)
418:)
378:)
353:)
330:)
309:)
278:|
249:)
232:)
142:)
110:|
106:|
102:|
98:|
93:|
89:|
84:|
80:|
58:)
48:.
917:☎
897:☎
850:(
743:(
613:(
561:(
511:(
480:·
474:·
466:·
459:·
453:·
447:·
441:·
436:(
414:(
374:(
349:(
326:(
318:*
305:(
301:—
245:(
228:(
220:(
178:*
138:(
126:)
116:(
114:)
76:(
54:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.