Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Satguru Mata Sudiksha

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 keep. – Joe (talk) 09:23, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Satguru Mata Sudiksha (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:GNG. There are many religious movements and many leaders of religious movements. I aim unable to determine what she is notable for in a Wikipedia sense. That she appears to be a decent human being is excellent, but I cannot see that an article n Wikipedia is merited. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 08:10, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 08:10, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 08:10, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sikhism-related deletion discussions. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 08:10, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 08:10, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On Wikipedia, the general inclusion threshold is whether the subject is notable enough for at least two people to have written something substantive (more than just a mention) about that subject that has been published in a reliable source.

The article has more than the minimum threshold in both English and Indian sources and so should be retained.

There are many leaders of religious movements but those leaders do not necessarily have references in mainstream media and so would not be eligible for an entry into Wikipedia. ES (talk) 09:01, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:44, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. As ES pointed out she does seem to meet WP:GNG. --WestCD (talk) 00:48, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:23, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. The nomination doesn't seem to advance any reason for deletion except that OP doesn't think this person deserves an article. But the SIGCOV is here and so are the sources. Atchom (talk) 02:22, 25 April 2022 (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.