Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yama Buddha

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 No Consensus.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); September 3, 2014; 17:42 (UTC)

Yama Buddha[edit]

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

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

Fails WP:BAND Kindzmarauli (talk) 17:45, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The subject fails WP:MUSICBIO, they have not received significant coverage in reliable sources. A very similar version of this article was deleted as unambiguous advertising just a little while ago. STATic message me! 05:25, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nepal-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:20, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:20, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar ♔ 20:01, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Yama Buddha is notable and also has coverage on reliable sources. I added Anil Adhikari as it is his original name. In Nepalese articles, sources from The himalayan times, ekantipur are reliable. Here are some sources:

- The Himalayan Times - Rap activism

- Ekantipur - Entertainment at the Edufair

Ascii002Talk Contribs 01:32, 22 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 07:51, 23 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep I think the quality of the article's writing style trivializes the apparent notability of Yama Buddha, and in some sections of the article, the inadequate attribution of sources hampers the article's quality. As it is, it's hard to tell whether Yama Buddha meets notability requirements, and I'm on the fence, but coming from a Western perspective, it's harder to evaluate notability qualifiers for a Nepalese musician and determine analogues of notability, so I think it's better to err on 'keep'. At the very least, this page would benefit from some solid cleanup to look more encyclopedic. Upjav (talk) 17:27, 24 August 2014 (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.