Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shri Swaminarayan Temple's

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 However, some improvements and some cleanup is needed for this article. --JForget 00:15, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shri Swaminarayan Temple's[edit]

This article has phone number,email and address of various temples.Earlier proded and prod removed by the author.Further it is mere list of temples for which there no articles and the moment a mere list.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 20:03, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep -As listed below their are many articles for many different faiths and groups which have there centers stated on wikipedia purely to show how far they have grown over time, it can not be classified as a directory at all on the contrary its very well accepted as being a very good reasearch tool for potential people whom wish to research into this faith.. Raj - सनातन धर्म (talk) 12:49, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - This article is about Swaminarayan temples, if there is a problem with phone numbers, email addresses and post addresses, they can be removed - Wheredevelsdare (talk) 20:12, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. ProDded in December and ProD removed by author but without addressing the issues - for example, fails WP:NOT#DIR. Springnuts (talk) 20:37, 27 March 2008 (UTC). Comment whatever happens please can we lose the apostrophe! Springnuts (talk) 18:43, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete~~, just a location/contact list for a bunch of religious centers. Outside encyclopedic bounds. --Dhartung | Talk 20:54, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions. —Ism schism (talk) 21:05, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Wikipedia is not a directory. That's all this is. DarkAudit (talk) 22:41, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep There are many examples of articles like this on Wikipedia, List of temples of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, List of yeshivas, and List of Roman Catholic archdioceses. These temples are important to the Swaminarayan tradition, especially those founded by him, and therefore should be kept as an article. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 22:49, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Have removed all contact details that were objected to. The page is now only about Swaminarayan Temples. Other articles like the ones suggested above as well as List of Hindu temples, similar to this one also exist, so I dont see any other problem with the article - Wheredevelsdare (talk) 23:53, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per examples above, especially List of temples of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Wikipedia does have lists, so change title to List of Swaminarayan temples (and lose the bleeping apostrophe in "temple's" please.....) ~ priyanath talk 00:11, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but move to List of Swaminarayan temples after the AFD closes. While the current article is just a plain list, the topic is clearly encyclopedic and can be developed into a article similar to the featured list, List of temples of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Here is a small sampling of references that can be used to add information about Swaminarayan temples:
- Barot, R., "Religion, Migration and Wealth Creation in the Swaminarayan Movement", The Transnational Family: New European Frontiers and Global Networks, Berg Publishers, 2002.
- Williams, Raymond Brady, A New Face of Hinduism: The Swaminarayan Religion, Cambridge University Press,, 1984
- Nesbitt, E., "Locating British Hindus' sacred space", Contemporary South Asia, 15(2) p. 195-208. Routledge, 2006.

We don't delete a verifiable articles on a notable topic just because it is stubby. Abecedare (talk) 00:48, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The nominator gave nothing approaching a valid reason for deletion. Phone numbers, emails and addresses can pretty obviously be removed by editing, as they have been. Phil Bridger (talk) 00:34, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and rewrite and/or move to List of Swaminarayan temples - the article is not well written but the content is probably notable. --Shruti14 ^{t c s} 21:50, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dusti^{talk to me} 16:46, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This article can be fixed but has high importance to Wikipedia, the deletion nominator also gave no reason for deletion, so I don't see why this article should be deleted.Mertozoro (talk) 19:28, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, address listings have been removed. Individual articles, of course, must each meet WP:N. --Dhartung | Talk 23:05, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Why the relisting? Consensus was already pretty clear to keep, and whatever happened after the relisting there's no way this could have swung more towards a deletion than a "no consensus", which would have meant keeping anyway. Phil Bridger (talk) 23:09, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I had the same question, and same conclusion. This should have been closed and kept per consensus. ~ priyanath talk 23:30, 3 April 2008 (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.