Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kadamba Kanana Swami

:{{la|Kadamba Kanana Swami}} – (View AfDView log)

:({{Find sources|Kadamba Kanana Swami}})

There's no coverage in independent reliable sources to establish notability. He's only mentioned in passing in RS cited in the article. Gaura79 (talk) 08:08, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- -- Cirt (talk) 14:09, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:10, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:11, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
• Strong Keep -- First grand-disciple of Swami Prabhupada who made it to be a ISKCON Guru, notable and sources independent of him confirm this fact. Wikid^as© 12:07, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

*Keep per Wikidas. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 02:07, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

---

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:32, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

• Delete 4 gnews hits does not cut it for WP:GNG. LibStar (talk) 05:31, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
• Restate Strong Keep Subject was the president of Krishna Balarama Mandir from 1990-95. The subject is a senior religious leader as he is an ISKCON Swami and Guru. This is cited in the article and more than meets the requirements for notability. Independent citations have been provided in the article as well. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 19:12, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

: you cannot !vote twice. LibStar (talk) 23:14, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

:: That's why the word restate is used. Please note that the closing admin.'s don't count votes, its about meeting the requirements of Wikipedia's policies. If you have any constructive comments concerning the discussion at hand, please feel free to share. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 00:33, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

• Delete No academic stature worth mentioning to pass WP:PROF, so I pass directly to the general criteria of WP:BIO. There, I cannot find significant coverage in reliable sources which are intellectually independent of the subject. The news article coverage involved appears to be trivial, rather than addressing the subject in depth. Ray^Talk 20:06, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

: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.