Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Salai Aandavargal

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 redirect to Meivazhi. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:01, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Salai Aandavargal[edit]

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

I made this article into a redirect, I was reverted, I'm bringing it here for wider discussion. I do not see any evidence of notability, and therefore believe that we should redirect or delete this article. Giant Snowman 19:35, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

I appreciate the time you have taken to review this page.

The page Salai Aandavargal is about a person, But You have redirected it to a page, Meivazhi Salai which is about a place. That's why I undid your changes.

Meivazhi is a religion based in south-india. It has a separate page titled "Meivazhi". But these articles are not very well written and has mixed information. The Page Meivazhi Salai does not have much information on the actual customs and practices followed by the Meivazhi people. But it merely tells of the life history of it's founder. The last topic is about "incorruptibility" which comes under religion and it should belong to the topic meivazhi. The Page Meivazhi is only a summary of Meivazhi Salai and does not provide any information about the religion.

Therefore, I intend to separate the content into the proper category before cleaning them.

I don't understand why a founder of a religion cannot have an independent article written about him in wikipedia. Please tell me if something offends you.

Darkxblade1 (talk) 20:27, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Above message copied from AFD talk page by Giant Snowman 20:51, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The articles on Meivazhi Salai and Meivazhi both appear to be about the same "monotheistic religion"...you have not evidenced why Salai Aandavargal merits an article of his own. Giant Snowman 20:53, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Meivazhi Salai is a village in Tamil Nadu, India. You could find it in Google Maps. I don't know if Salai Aandavargal merits an article of his own or not. But separating his biography from the village Meivazhi Salai could provide space for writing more relevant information on the village. Darkxblade1 (talk) 21:29, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What sources are the contents of these articles on? The content needs to be verifiable. Candleabracadabra (talk) 00:11, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If the target of the redirect was your concern why did you not change it? Also your signature still violates WP:SIGLINK, please change it. Giant Snowman 21:33, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for the inconvenience caused. Darkxblade1 (talk) 19:33, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:19, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:19, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:19, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Meivazhi. A page on the religion is a very appropriate place to cover its founder. There can even be a section on the founder and a targeted redirect to it. If and when the content and sourcing become too much for that page it can be spun off. Meivazhi Salai should cover the town and its geography. Candleabracadabra (talk) 00:05, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Meivazhi. I agree that a page on religion is a very appropriate place to cover its founder. Initially, the article was redirected to a page which was about a village. Now it has been fixed. This article no longer needs an independent page. It may be redirected to the page Meivazhi which now has the contents of this article. Darkxblade1 (talk) 19:30, 11 July 2013 (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.