Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pauli Jumma Masjid

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. Courcelles (talk) 20:41, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Pauli Jumma Masjid[edit]

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

I couldn't found significant coverage by reliable, third-party sources to establish notability. Fails both, GNG and WP:GEOFEAT. Even no reliable source to certify that the Masjid actually exists and not coined by the creator. Jim Carter 13:00, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Question: Why was the CSD tag removed and the article brought here? Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:08, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No idea, Kudpung, I saw it just now! Maybe it was due to edit conflict. G11 still doesn't applies however, I don't consider it to be exclusively promotional given that it's an extremely short article and by just removing a sentence the problem gets fixed. Cheers, Jim Carter 13:22, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

P. S. I think I should have Prod'd it instead. Jim Carter 13:25, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I would have speedied this if a GF editor hadn't stated that he didn't think it was spam. IMHO, there's nothing but spam plus the usual deprecated junk like addresses and social media. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:14, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I was the one who nom'd for CSD. Obvious WP:COI by the creator and there's nothing but WP:SPS for sources. --Drm310 (talk) 19:03, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 04:48, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 04:48, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as there's simply no improvement at this time. SwisterTwister talk 04:48, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:49, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:49, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:49, 5 October 2015 (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.