| Revision as of 19:52, 9 December 2006 editBaristarim (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users28,782 editsm →[]← Previous edit | Revision as of 00:13, 10 December 2006 edit undoTalkAbout (talk | contribs)2,020 edits Why I created the articleNext edit → | ||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
| *'''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) | *'''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) | ||
| *'''Delete''' per nom ] 19:52, 9 December 2006 (UTC) | *'''Delete''' per nom ] 19:52, 9 December 2006 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Why I created it.'''...I recently started this article ] once all information about ExBKs was removed from the ] article (the current article is in a mess)and I frankly was not allowed to edit by ] AKA Riveros11 et Al (and the IT Team of which ] is the Official Representative and feeling that the Admins did not see that ] was merely intimidating/harassing me despite having offered the citations with the edits. Since the new article has been set for deletion and Admin ] states I am part of this arbitration I will be submitting a statement within a day. The reason I feel that this information is of value is because this represents an apostasy group which the Brahma Kumaris have suppressed along with others for decades. The ] are engaged in asserting influence in governmental bodies, the ] and others when their true doctrines are kept secret. As this apostate group comes to light more organizations are giving it recognition as per the links provided. No I am not an ExBK, I am but one editor up against an IT Team, taking my time and money (buying books) to bring this out in the open as I see suppression of information as causing a great societal harm. PEACE] 00:13, 10 December 2006 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 00:13, 10 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)
- Delete per nom Baristarim 19:52, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
- Why I created it....I recently started this article Brahma Kumaris Info once all information about ExBKs was removed from the Brahma Kumaris article (the current article is in a mess)and I frankly was not allowed to edit by avyak7 AKA Riveros11 et Al (and the IT Team of which Bksimonb is the Official Representative and feeling that the Admins did not see that avyakt7 was merely intimidating/harassing me despite having offered the citations with the edits. Since the new article has been set for deletion and Admin ≈ jossi ≈ states I am part of this arbitration I will be submitting a statement within a day. The reason I feel that this information is of value is because this represents an apostasy group which the Brahma Kumaris have suppressed along with others for decades. The Brahma Kumaris are engaged in asserting influence in governmental bodies, the UN and others when their true doctrines are kept secret. As this apostate group comes to light more organizations are giving it recognition as per the links provided. No I am not an ExBK, I am but one editor up against an IT Team, taking my time and money (buying books) to bring this out in the open as I see suppression of information as causing a great societal harm. PEACETalkAbout 00:13, 10 December 2006 (UTC)