Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Swami Aseemanand

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. postdlf (talk) 21:49, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Swami Aseemanand

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

As per WP:CRIME A person who is known only in connection with a criminal event or trial should not normally be the subject of a separate Wikipedia article if there is an existing article that could incorporate the available encyclopedic material relating to that person. also A living person accused of a crime is presumed not guilty unless and until this is decided by a court of law. Editors must give serious consideration to not creating an article on an alleged perpetrator when no conviction is yet secured sarvajna (talk) 20:45, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Obvious keep Per the policy given as a rationale for deletion "criminal or victim in question should be the subject of a Wikipedia article only if one of the following applies: "he victim or person wrongly convicted, consistent with WP:BLP1E had a large role within a well-documented historic event. The historic significance is indicated by persistent coverage of the event in reliable secondary sources that devote significant attention to the individual's role" which this individual obviously did. He is also a noted VHP member, "the VHP to send one of its most enterprising clerics on a special assignment in 1997: Swami Aseemanand" Annual Review of the Sociology of Religion: Volume 2: Religion and Politics Brill p208 His role in terrorist attacks are also the subject of academic books. Encyclopedia of Terrorism p648 "In December 2010 authorities alleged that the Swami Aseemanand and the Saffron terror outfits" Darkness Shines (talk) 21:05, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. —Mike moral ♪♫ 21:49, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. —Mike moral ♪♫ 21:49, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:40, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Terrorism-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:40, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep He is a noted Vishwa Hindu Parishad member and an arrested terrorist. "A living person accused of a crime is presumed not guilty unless and until this is decided by a court of law. Editors must give serious consideration to not creating an article on an alleged perpetrator when no conviction is yet secured." I really dont understand this logic,we are not convicting but merely just informing about him! Uncletomwood (talk) 09:35, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Aseemanand is not an arrested terrorist, but an arrested alleged terrorist. The distinction is very important. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:20, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 19:02, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The subject is clearly notable per the sources cited in the article and in this discussion. We do, of course, need to be careful not to make claims, such as "terrorist", that are not supported by cast-iron reliable sources. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:23, 2 July 2013 (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.