Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gurudwara Dashmesh Darbar Sahib (New Jersey)

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. — Joseph Fox 13:45, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Gurudwara Dashmesh Darbar Sahib (New Jersey)

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

not notable, mostly just information about the organization which belongs on their website not wikipedia, the information about sikhism can be found under the Sikhism article CapMan07008 (talk) 19:33, 15 August 2011 (UTC) CapMan07008 (talk) 19:33, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sikhism-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 19:39, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 19:39, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is not ethical to write about something which is not a Famous thing. I respect all the religions but I am sorry to say this is not supposed to be an article on wikipedia. I have therefore approached from Speedy deletion of the page. For any queries, Contact on my talk page.
Regards,
Shroffameen (talk) 20:46, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as failing notability criteria for inclusion. All sources I found in a quick search were either related to the subject or were unreliable. Strip away the "About Sikhism" section (which ought to be covered in a more encyclopedic manner in the Sikhism article) and what we're left with is an article that qualifies as A7 and maybe G11. I'm not sure if a 5-year-old article can be speedily deleted; I'll tag it and let an admin decide. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 21:49, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, possibly speedily as A7. I've removed the "About Sikhism" section because it is not appropriate for this article and does nothing toward establishing the encyclopedic value of this article. What's left is possibly also a G11, but I see no coverage showing why this particular gurdwara meets WP:GNG. --Kinu ^t/_c 22:07, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Uncertain First of all, our standard is notability, which is much much less than fame. "Famous" - an abridged encyclopedia. There were two topics in the article. One is the 19th Sikh games, which I removed (and I will see if I can make an article about it as a separate article about the annual event if I can find references for it.) The other topic is a Sikh temple, " the biggest gurudwara in Mew Jersey," to quote the article. I have not checked for citations yet. But it is not a speedy. I consider the article factual not advertising, so its not a G11, and it makes a clear claim to importance, so it is not A7. DGG ( talk ) 22:20, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete speedily,Although it is well written (the possible cause on why it has been unnoticed for 5 years) but it still has absolutely no independent references to anything mentioned in the article. Despite the fact I'm relatively new and don't understand everything as well as you all do, but I still think this fits nicely under A7 CapMan07008 ( talk ) 00:02, 17 August 2011 (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.