This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ret.Prof (talk | contribs) at 15:36, 7 December 2021 (→Garbhadhan (astrology)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 15:36, 7 December 2021 by Ret.Prof (talk | contribs) (→Garbhadhan (astrology))(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Garbhadhan (astrology)
New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- How to contribute
- Introduction to deletion process
- Guide to deletion (glossary)
- Help, my article got nominated for deletion!
- Garbhadhan (astrology) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:NFRINGE. WP:TNT eligible article with massive violation of WP:MEDRS. On the basis of WP:Fringe theory of astrology, the article makes numerous claims (in Misplaced Pages voice) about Human reproduction, sexual behavior and child physiology. Eg. "Having sex at X hrs will produce Y type of child", "If at the time of commencement of menses the lagna for that moment is aspected by Mars the woman will have sexual union with an evil person; if aspected by the Sun, with a noble ruler and if aspected by Saturn, with a servant." Only source are from unreliable fringe theory books and publishers. The creator is blocked for multiple copyright violations. Venkat TL (talk) 11:12, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
Gem of a Quote from article.
- "if the woman conceives after the appearance of menses
- • on the 4th night she will bear a short-lived son,
- • on the 7th night a barren daughter,
- • on the 11th night a wretched ugly daughter,
- • on the 13th night an evil-minded and disgraceful daughter" Venkat TL (talk) 11:12, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Venkat TL (talk) 11:12, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Venkat TL (talk) 11:12, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions. Venkat TL (talk) 11:12, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Astronomy-related deletion discussions. Venkat TL (talk) 11:12, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Venkat TL (talk) 11:12, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
- Delete with or without redirect to another article (Hindu astrology suggests itself). Nothing in the page is clearly written or adequately sourced, so nothing needs to be preserved by merging. XOR'easter (talk) 16:30, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
- Redirect to existing article Garbhadhana: that deals with the religious and ritual aspects of the concept, whereas this one deals with the astrology, so does not duplicate the other. The sources given don't seem to be accessible online but hard-copy sources are acceptable, I believe. The nom dismisses them as "fringe", but the tone of the nomination implies that the nom is likely to dismiss any sources dealing with astrology as "fringe", so it looks like a Catch-22. The criticisms on medical grounds are oddly misplaced: this doesn't purport to be a medical article but to give the details of the astrological theory. Ingratis (talk) 14:19, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
- @Ingratis this title with disambiguation included is not a plausible search term, hence the redirect is unnecessary and will be a candidate for deletion (according to WP:R#DELETE). Regarding the comments about nom, please know that nom is a Hindu and has a decent understanding of Hindu Astrology to be able to separate the wheat from chaff and decide what aspect of astrology is fit for a general encyclopedia. An interested reader is better served reading the topic elsewhere. The article fails WP:NFRINGE by a mile. Venkat TL (talk) 14:38, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
- Delete without redirect. I don't see how "(astrology)" accompanying Garbhadhan is a plausible search term. Tayi Arajakate Talk 15:34, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
- Genuinely unsure of the answer here, but isn't a redirect helpful in order to avoid breaking the links from articles that currently link to this one? There are many, and sending those links to Garbhadhana instead seems appropriate. But if the problem of redlinks would be resolved without a redirect, no need for one, as I agree the parenthetical phrase is not a plausible search term.~ L 🌸 (talk) 05:49, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
- @LEvalyn, After removing this link from the template at the bottom, there are 0 articles that links to this. See here. So I think this is not a concern. Venkat TL (talk) 06:12, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
- Genuinely unsure of the answer here, but isn't a redirect helpful in order to avoid breaking the links from articles that currently link to this one? There are many, and sending those links to Garbhadhana instead seems appropriate. But if the problem of redlinks would be resolved without a redirect, no need for one, as I agree the parenthetical phrase is not a plausible search term.~ L 🌸 (talk) 05:49, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
- @Venkat TL, ah, thank you! I hadn't noticed that, just noticed it was odd how many incoming links there were... Totally agreed there is no need for a redirect now. ~ L 🌸 (talk) 06:14, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
- Keep or (perhaps preferable) Merge to Garbhadhana. Certainly clean up is required, but there is clearly a large literature on the astrological dimension of this Samskara and that should be reflected on wiki (in the same way that we reflect other traditions of astrology). I do not think that many readers who were not already disposed to treat Hindu astrology as true would mistake the article's claims for information on how reproduction etc actually work, but, if the article is giving that impression, that requires correction, not deletion. No evidence has been provided that the citations are "from unreliable fringe theory books and publishers" (Chaturvedi (1977) is published by Motilal Banarsidass). Rather, the problem seems to be that these are largely primary sources, but said primary sources tend to confirm that this information is not fringe, since they're major Hindu texts like Brihat Jataka, Utpala (astronomer), Jataka Parijata, Jataka Tattva. The nominator's claim to be able "to separate the wheat from chaff and decide what aspect of astrology is fit for a general encyclopedia" is not an acceptable ground for deletion, since we are essentially asked to take their word for it - what sources should a reliable passage on Hindu astrological ideas about Garbhadhana be based? Furius (talk) 19:31, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 23:47, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- Keep but needs work. - Ret.Prof (talk) 15:36, 7 December 2021 (UTC)