Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Śrī Deḍimuṇḍa Deviyo

From 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 keep. (non-admin closure) Anarchyte (work | talk) 08:43, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dedimunda deviyo (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)

An unsourced Sinhalese god. The content fails WP:V, and the god possibly fails WP:N.

This article has been tagged as unsourced since 2012, for some five years. It's therefore unlikely that better sources will appear soon. A Google Books search does show references to a deity named Dedimunda, but apparently more in the way of passing mentions; judging from that, this seems to be a minor deity or perhaps an aspect of some other god.

In any case, we'd need an expert to rewrite the article; the present content is a POV essay written from the "in-universe" perspective of a believer. I recommend deletion without prejudice to a competent, sourced rewrite from scratch, if that is possible. More likely this topic is better covered in an overview article about Sinhalese religion, but lacking sources, we can't merge any of this content.  Sandstein  11:09, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Buddhism-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:37, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sri Lanka-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:37, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:54, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I looked at the edit history and I noticed a user has added sources and more information to the page, they have also added an image to it as well. As a result of that, I believe it should be kept. (120.144.166.4 (talk) 06:56, 7 June 2017 (UTC))[reply]
Note I just noticed the user who made the edits, commented above. I agree with their argument on developing the page. (120.144.166.4 (talk) 07:32, 7 June 2017 (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.