Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ambalavana Navalar

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete‎. plicit 23:18, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ambalavana Navalar

Ambalavana Navalar (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)

Deleted and declined x 4 at Draft:Ambalavana Navalar and created in mainspace. I can find references to texts written by him, but nothing to indicate notability. I'm sure offline non English sourcing may exist, but at the moment this is cross-wiki spam with no ability to establish whether he meets N:AUTHOR or other biographic notability Star Mississippi 20:00, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reference Number Reference Comments Independent Significant Reliable Secondary
1 tamil.wiki/ The source is a wiki, and cannot be considered a reliable source. Yes Yes No Yes
2 archive.org/details/SatgurumanimalaiAmbalavanaNavalar1912 An image of an article in a book. Because it is an image, it cannot be machine-translated, and so cannot be treated as a reliable source. Probably Probably No Probably
3 shaivam.org/scripture/Tamil This appears to be a translation of a writing by the subject. Yes Not about the subject Unknown Probably
4 archive.org/details/SatgurumanimalaiAmbalavanaNavalar1912 Same as 2 Probably Probably No Probably

So the article does not appear to be supported by the references, at least not if verifiability and notability are observed. The subject may be notable based on other sources, so draftification would be in order, except that there is already a declined draft. This article is a better draft than the current draft, and so can reasonably replace the current draft. The submitter should be warned that tendentiously resubmitting a draft without improving it is disruptive and may lead to sanctions. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:56, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.