Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Meher Baba's missing book

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. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 17:19, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Meher Baba's missing book[edit]

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

I fail to see much notability of the subject and non-trivial significant coverage about it, except in the biographical hagiography of Meher Baba and self-sources.Trivial mentions in related books are located. Notability isn't inherited.

Part of a walled garden around Meher Baba.Nukable mess.

And, to anybody who's asking me that why I'm here, without ATD-R stuff, I'm unwilling to waste precious time and resources in t/p threads like this. ~ Winged Blades^Godric 07:22, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. ~ Winged Blades^Godric 07:23, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 08:58, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Failing to see notability is a valid argument for Wikipedia and I don't know if it can fixed or not, due especially to the known tendency of the group of people involved in Meher Baba to not promote their views. But the thing about a "walled garden", a "nukable mess", and editors that might be asking you why you are here, as well as writing in another AfD that I have been "wasting your precious time" (which I find very unkind) simply because I posted a few lines in your talk page, reflect personal views and bias that have no place in the deletion process. Hoverfish Talk 09:18, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- @Hoverfish:--Feel free to search for independent sources covering the topic in a non-trivial manner and present them here for evaluation.That's the sole way, you can fix the topic i.e. prevent the deletion.Dazedbythebell a.k.a Sharnak is a certain exception to the known tendency.And, somehow, it seems that the inhabitant(s) of the walled-garden were trying to have some attempts at righting great wrongs by utilising WP to bringing publicity upon the Meher-baba-cult.Rest assured, these events are severely frowned upon and often end with disbursing of T-bans.As to walled garden, absolutely.Two long-standing editors other than me (See this and this t/p thread(s)) ‎have agreed with my perception.As to Nukable mess, absolutely.These blatant attempts at cult-promotion and related vanity-stuff ought to be nuked, on sight.As to mentioning my reasons of avoiding ATDR, I'm sure one of the AFDs will gather the spotlight of some of our esteemed members of WP:ARS, whose favorite argument at every AfD is that no attempts at ATD-r has been taken.Best,~ Winged Blades^Godric 10:00, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, a notable sourced topic. Nominator seems to have a good faith bias against Baba pages (language like "cult", etc.), so the closer should please take that into consideration. Wikipedia has a very good Meher Baba collection, and, from the language used above and on one of the links to a talk page, dismantling it and chipping away at it seems agenda-driven and not encyclopedic (just to be clear because of the "paint with tar brush" language used, I'm not in a Baba cult - although I am also not in a cult ruled by Poppy, she makes us say that). Randy Kryn (talk) 14:29, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Sources please.......It's expected to find ample mentions even about the most of trivial events in anyone's career/life in his/her hagiography.~ Winged Blades^Godric 15:55, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - This article does not read like any type of "hagiography" and it is not trivial given the established notability of Meher Baba. It is about his only hand-written book. Hoverfish Talk 16:21, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    - The article does not looks like one, Bhau's biography does.And, it's pretty good old common sense that any biography of any subject will cover a lot of events in his/her life in quite details.Do you think all such events deserve an encyclopedic article? Coverage in biographies can be only used to bolster up the verifiability of an article, only after it has been proved that the event is notable enough, courtesy it's coverage in independent sources.So, provide those independent sources.....~ Winged Blades^Godric 04:15, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      - No I don't think any event of the biography deserves a separate article, but I think this topic is important because it is about the one book that was hand written by Meher Baba. I and other editors of the Meher Baba articles are aware of the shortcomings of Bhau's book. But since it also contains carefully recorded historical facts, there has been an effort to use it only for factual references and not to include any subjective evaluations or get into any controversial issues. The reason I see for having separate articles for some few key topics is not to overload the main biography article with side issues. I was little part of the GA process but I know it has been plenty of work to reach there and I know this was an issue. Some of the articles you nominated can be merged there without causing any serious problem. I am asking for "keep" where I'd rather they stay separate even if finally they get deleted. I am sorry all you see here is "cult stuff" that needs to go, because I equally dislike "cult stuff" but my interest in Meher Baba's world-view and the relation of it to philosophy makes me see special importance to his original writings. Hoverfish Talk 11:11, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        That's not how notability works.Feel free to merge a line or two into Meher Baba, but subjects that have not been covered by out-of-the-universe sources do not get a standalone article, at-best a redirect may be implemented......And, I will restate that the personal views of the editorial community (you, me and all other to-be discussants) are irrelevant as to the need of a standalone article and borders on ILIKEIT stuff.It is sources and only sources that matter(s).Obviously, the views of the editorial community matters as to the quality of the sourcing, determination of triviality et al...~ Winged Blades^Godric 11:32, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
~~Keep~~ Neutral. This article contains information about the only hand-written book by Meher Baba. The information present here comes from a big collection of diaries and notes kept by Meher Baba's original followers all compiled into a book by Bhau Kalchuri. The information in this article does not contain evaluations but historic facts. There were no other "independent observers" keeping records, so it's all we have to go by. Also the original diaries that were kept are available online (though difficult to search through as they are pictures of text) for cross checking. The notability of Meher Baba has been established, and so have some of his main works, like his main book "God Speaks". I am surprized by some of the trigger-happiness that is expressed in these deletions, also behind the lines, and the language used. I complained, but it seems there is a jargon of derogatory and aggressive terms used here that is commonly accepted by some editors involved. The issue of limited independent sources availble for covering some topics is a known and much discussed probelm in this group of articles, but there is nothing unenclopedic about the inclusion of this article. Hoverfish Talk 15:40, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- And, your arguments nicely put forward the case of deletion.~ Winged Blades^Godric 15:55, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No indication of notability. No independent sources. Edward321 (talk) 14:17, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Too esoteric for Wikipedia. Belongs on a Blog. Dazedbythebell (talk) 15:42, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Can't find any independent sources to support notability. GSS (talk|c|em) 17:28, 13 May 2018 (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.