Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Regunta Yesurathnam

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 no consensus. Sandstein 09:08, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Regunta Yesurathnam (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I don't know anything about the subject, but suspect it fails WP:BIO/WP:NPROF. It is heavily footnoted, but few of the sources appear to be independent/3rd party/WP:RS, and those that are, appear to mention Yesurathnam only in passing. Was previously deleted as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/R. Yesurathnam. I would have speedy deleted it again as a recreation, but too much time had passed. Jayjg ^(talk) 16:07, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 17:05, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 17:05, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 17:05, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep passes WP:NAUTHOR criteria one: "The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors." as his "works are available in nearly 35 research institutes of repute, consisting of Seminaries, state universities and Research Academies across Asia, Australia, Europe, and North America. The Systematic Theologian, Michael Amaladoss, SJ, of the Institute of Dialogue with Cultures and Religions, Loyola College, Chennai has accessioned a title of Yesurathnam in 2014 which is available at the Institute". Atlantic306 (talk) 17:21, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep At the very least, he has enough publications. I suspect there is more about him that is notable but do not know enough to be sure. Peterkingiron (talk) 10:35, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment if kept, this article needs a complete rewrite and a thorough check for copyright violations. It is hagiographic tripe even after my substantial recent pruning. I'm not convinced that he is widely cited, nor necessarily favourably so, and I don't think the holdings of seminaries etc count for much when it comes to assessing NAUTHOR. But I'm not going to !vote delete because I know it is damn near pointless when it comes to articles about authors. Let's just say that the article is crap and an embarrassment but I don't have access to sufficient of the sources to fix it entirely. - Sitush (talk) 19:39, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Per Atlantic306 , passes WP:NAUTHOR.But needs a rewrite. Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 20:41, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Not notable author. This article is like a pamphlet. Participating seminars is not suffecient for a Priest to become notable. Rayabhari (talk)

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.