Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Swami Avdheshanand Giri (2nd nomination)

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. Missvain (talk) 22:56, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Swami Avdheshanand Giri

Swami Avdheshanand Giri (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article was deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Swami Avdheshanand Giri on 29 March 2021. A deletion review at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2021 April 26 closed as relist. I am performing this relist as a neutral administrative action.

Some courses of action in the process so far have tended to make it difficult to achieve consensus. Therefore in this debate, which I hope will be conclusive, I would urge participants to:

  • Be open to opinions other than their own
  • Focus on providing a high quality of sources rather than a high quantity
  • Refrain from expecting sources to be in English language

Stifle (talk) 09:48, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete based on the bilingual source analysis I conducted in the previous AFD which has not been refuted either at the AFD or the deletion review. The sources presented newly at the DR were only minor mentions. No new sources showing WP:GNG have been forthcoming. VV 11:39, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 18:44, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 18:44, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 18:44, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep source analysis has been duly refuted at the previous AFD nomination by several editors and also at deletion review. The newly presented sources were not minor mentions, they are very much in sync with WP:GNG and that too has been duly explained in the Deletion Review. The notability of the subject is very much evident through the independent media sources presented in the article. Shatbhisha6 (talk) 15:35, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Shatbhisha6 (talkcontribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 Talk Work 12:46, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Run n Fly (talk) 15:49, 26 May 2021 (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.