| Revision as of 17:41, 9 December 2006 editJossi (talk | contribs)72,880 edits →[]← Previous edit | Revision as of 18:00, 9 December 2006 edit undoAntonrojo (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users5,857 edits deleteNext edit → | ||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
| * '''Delete''' Clearly using wikipedia for advertisement purposes. It goes against and it does not have any credibility (as far as notability of the author,degrees,level of expertise, etc.) ] 15:17, 9 December 2006 (UTC) | * '''Delete''' Clearly using wikipedia for advertisement purposes. It goes against and it does not have any credibility (as far as notability of the author,degrees,level of expertise, etc.) ] 15:17, 9 December 2006 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Delete''' non-notable and reads as an advertisement. — <span style="font-family: Comic Sans MS">] </font> 16:43, 9 December 2006 (UTC) | *'''Delete''' non-notable and reads as an advertisement. — <span style="font-family: Comic Sans MS">] </font> 16:43, 9 December 2006 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Delete''' in agreement with Jossi's 'no links' comment. IF there are good sources showing that the group the site says it represents exists is notable then I'd suggest refactoring the article to discuss the group. Since their site isn't notable I think this is unlikely. ] 18:00, 9 December 2006 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 18:00, 9 December 2006
Brahma Kumaris Info
Non-notable website. Lack of secondary sources. If relevant, material could be merged into Brahma Kumaris after deletion. (Note: that article and involved editors are in the evaluation stage for an ArbCom case. See WP:RFAR#Brahma_Kumaris_World_Spiritual_University) ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 01:08, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
- Delete and merge any material based on secondary sources to Brahma Kumaris, as nominator. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 02:42, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
- Delete Fails WP:WEB, if possible delete under CSD A7. Tarret 01:12, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
- Merge with Brahma Kumaris. SkierRMH 02:18, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
- Delete and merge as per nom, and if AfD fails it needs a hell of a lot of clean-up. Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 04:12, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
- Delete - fails WP:WEB. MER-C 04:47, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
- Keep - Notable article. Plenty of independent google hits. The article was only created a mere 24 hours ago. Let's give it some time to develop before debating whether to axe it. Looks like there are already some interesting sources given at the bottom of the article - if given time, more sources will likely be appended as well. Smeelgova 06:01, 9 December 2006 (UTC).
- Comment - no, it doesn't have many google hits - a query on "Brahma Kumaris Info" returns hits on info about Brahma Kumaris and not information related to the webpage Brahma Kumaris Info (brahmakumaris.info). The search string "brahmakumaris.info -site:wikipedia.org -site:brahmakumaris.info" (excluding wikipedia and self-references) returns more relevant results, and those aren't too many: 287. Most of which are link listings and message board postings. Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 13:29, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
- Comment search for link:www.brahmakumaris.info or link:brahmakumaris.info shows zero links to this site. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 17:41, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
- Delete Clearly using wikipedia for advertisement purposes. It goes against and it does not have any credibility (as far as notability of the author,degrees,level of expertise, etc.) avyakt7 15:17, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
- Delete non-notable and reads as an advertisement. — Seadog 16:43, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
- Delete in agreement with Jossi's 'no links' comment. IF there are good sources showing that the group the site says it represents exists is notable then I'd suggest refactoring the article to discuss the group. Since their site isn't notable I think this is unlikely. Antonrojo 18:00, 9 December 2006 (UTC)