Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Velappaya Mahadevar temple

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:52, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Velappaya Mahadevar temple

[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 RS found found based on a google search. Sohom (talk) 04:38, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture, Hinduism, and Kerala. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:33, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I also found nothing. ‍Relativity ⚡️ 19:46, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am still at a delete stance. Citation 1 is just a list of a whole bunch of temples. Citation 2 dedicates exactly seventeen words to the temple and just says its location. The legend of the temple is not going to help contribute to notability much. I don't know about citation four but it's a census which does not give me hope for the amount of SIGCOV it has. Citation 5 is just a list of temples, I have questions about the reliability of citations 6 and 7, and I don't know about citation 8. ‍Relativity ⚡️ 02:21, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

retain this article because this article deals with the temple among the 108 Shiva Temples in India and as per Wikipedia guidelines it is enough for an article with three lines and subsequent wikipedians improve it. பொதுஉதவி (talk) 12:55, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Just added a few references and more info to the article. More seems to be available since there are published works containing this topic. The article now passes WP:GNG. Rasnaboy (talk) 19:07, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Noting that non of the sources added are considered RS. Most of them are listicals or travel guides that provide little to no reliable information. Sohom (talk) 20:22, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
draftify is the best option as, currently the article lacks historical context, reliable sources, and much more QueerEcofeminist🌈 16:18, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Considered in the WP:LOCAL, it has Reliable sources ~~ Spworld2 (talk) 11:07, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:LOCAL is not a policy. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 07:05, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as there is a difference of opinion on the quality of sources. They need to be reliable sources that provide SIGCOV, not passing mentions. Also, User:பொதுஉதவி, I'd like to now what "Wikipedia guidelines" you are referring to in your Keep opinion,
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:40, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: sorry but without any reliable sources available, this temple is not notable. The pleas for keep unfortunately do not relate to any of Wikipedia's standards. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:34, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I did a WP:BEFORE on "Velappaya Shiva Temple" and "Velappaya Mahadevar Temple", but there are no hits on google books or scholars. I believe the temple may have had a different name in earlier times or it is known by another keyword. This could be improved if we can identify the correct term to search for. User:Spworld2, User:Rasnaboy, User:பொதுஉதவி Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 05:41, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~Keep~~. As per Google books, a book titled 'The Mahabharta : A Summary For Beginners' written by the author Madhavan Kutty Manikath and published by 'Author's Ink Publications', at the footnote on page number 130, it is mentioned about Velappaya Mahadevar Temple, at Thrissur, in Kerala.

பொதுஉதவி (talk) 06:15, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:பொதுஉதவி, you have voted already and a mere mention of the temple's name in a book does not make it notable. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 07:00, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've struck the duplicate vote. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:08, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, still no consensus or agreement on sourcing. At this point, it would be helpful to get a source assessment table (or a less formal review) to see where the truth lies.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:10, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 08:04, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: of the online sources, only one provides any detail about the subject. The others are just lists. As a result, this article fails WP:GNG due to lack of WP:SIGCOV.DesiMoore (talk) 20:13, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per DesiMoore. TrangaBellam (talk) 21:09, 22 September 2024 (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.