Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ausar Auset Society

{{AFD help}}

:{{la|1=Ausar Auset Society}} – (View AfDView log | edits since nomination)

:({{Find sources AFD|title=Ausar Auset Society}})

Lack of notability Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 09:53, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:59, 20 March 2025 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:59, 20 March 2025 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:59, 20 March 2025 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of North America-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 10:00, 20 March 2025 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 10:00, 20 March 2025 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Egypt-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 10:00, 20 March 2025 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Paganism and Spirituality. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:50, 20 March 2025 (UTC)
• Delete{{snd}}While I did find mentions of the Ausar Auset Society in quite a few scholarly sources, they were exclusively trivial ones that mentioned it as an example of Black / African spiritualism, new religious movements or cults. In-depth coverage is limited to publications by the Ausar Auset Society itself or adjacent organisations. Yue🌙 23:51, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

:Keep the chapter devoted to this in a Routledge book and the Encyclopedia source are enough. PARAKANYAA (talk) 03:55, 22 March 2025 (UTC)

::Also [https://archive.org/details/encyclopediaofaf00murp/page/56/mode/2up?q=%22Ausar+Auset+Society%22] [https://archive.org/details/encyclopediaofoc00jgor_0/page/96/mode/2up?q=%22Ausar+Auset+Society%22] [https://archive.org/details/meltonsencyclope0008melt/page/702/mode/2up?q=%22Ausar+Auset+Society%22].

::This group appears in basically every significant NRM encyclopedia - quite absurd for us not to have it! PARAKANYAA (talk) 04:00, 22 March 2025 (UTC)

:::Also [https://archive.org/details/encyclopediaofbl0000unse_r0x0/page/104/mode/2up?q=%22Ausar+Auset+Society%22] [https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=IBKMDwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=%22Ausar+Auset+Society%22&ots=AcOtubT4S6&sig=7StjYuVQTo8dVo9N3ytaFHhU5Bg#v=onepage&q=%22Ausar%20Auset%20Society%22&f=false] [https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9781315728650-3/inventing-africa-fredrik-gregorius] [https://archive.org/details/traditiontransfo00kara/page/32/mode/2up?q=%22Ausar+Auset+Society%22]

:::This fulfills WP:GNG. WP:NORG explicitly says it does not apply to religions, but even if it did it would pass that too. PARAKANYAA (talk) 15:05, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

::::Keep per the above argument and sources. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 18:12, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

::For reference, that's [https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9781315569505-19/divining-sisters-reflections-experience-divination-priestess-ausar-auset-society this]. Definitely significant coverage. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 18:14, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

:

• Weak Delete. Right now the page has been around since 2005. But it looks so underdeveloped. Some previous revisions had more content about the movement but not much citation. As such it make more sense as a section than a stand alone article. Ramos1990 (talk)

::Notability is based on the existence of sources, not the development of the article. As far as I know, stubs aren’t against the rules - a section on what? That argument would make sense if you are proposing a merge, but you are not. PARAKANYAA (talk) 22:22, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

:::Agreed. There's clearly enough sourcing to make a detailed article. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 18:15, 4 April 2025 (UTC)

:

• Keep per PARAKANYAA. The four entries for this group in various encyclopedias and the three books that discuss it in detail are clearly enough to satisfy WP:GNG. MCE89 (talk) 09:59, 6 April 2025 (UTC)
• Keep per PARAKANYAA. Also, Professor Asante, Ama Mazama, and Reddie are credible scholars. Tamsier (talk) 21:37, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.