Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shakatambika

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. But willing to revise if anything backing Jinabi's claims of significance arises. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 08:25, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Shakatambika[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

No references since 2010. Quick search did not find any reliable independent source. The temple is there but not notable to be included here. PROD contested and comments are on talkpage. Nizil (talk) 14:56, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:23, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:23, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - This article should be expanded, cleaned up and properly cited, but it's a temple related to a rather important family in Indian history. --Jinabi (talk) 8:36, April 29 2019 (UTC)

@Jinabi:, can you find me some reliable sources for citation. I could not find. The temple is there but notability must be established with sources to have an article.Which is that important family you are talking about?-Nizil (talk) 03:02, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 17:24, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - completely lacking in citations, could be all made up - WP:NBUILDING states, "Buildings, including private residences and commercial developments may be notable as a result of their historic, social, economic, or architectural importance, but they require significant coverage by reliable, third-party sources to establish notability." - Epinoia (talk) 00:27, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MrClog (talk) 17:09, 9 May 2019 (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.