Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nellikathuruthi Kazhakam

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 draftify. ✗plicit 12:43, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nellikathuruthi Kazhakam

[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)

Quite why I didn't go G1 with this, I don't know. Article is almost entirely indecipherable. "Nellikathuruthy Kazhakam is an important Kazhakam" - the word Kazhakham is linked to a 1996 film of that name. Where Nellikathuruthy Kazhakam is - and quite what it is, is not defined. It's certainly not defined in the sources presented, none of which actually mention Nellikathuruthy Kazhakam - the article is a neat little bit of OR/SYNTH - presented in such convoluted and gramatically poor English that it's hard to sort out quite what is happening here: "Problems that could not be solved in other poles would then reach this pocket" is a typical example. It's borderline gibberish, fails WP:GNG and needs to go to perhaps make way, one day, for an article about a well defined thing that is written well enough and sourced well enough to let the casual reader know quite what thing it is about. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 11:54, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Religion, India, and Kerala. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 11:54, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ummmmm……. Wow! What on earth is this about? Mccapra (talk) 17:39, 23 July 2022 (UTC) about?[reply]

Comment - One of the refs ([1]) clarify that a kazhakham is a temple organization. --Soman (talk) 02:04, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:28, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:48, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify There may be a notable topic in here but at the moment this is little more than word salad and I can’t see how collaborative editing could improve it in its current state. The creator needs to do some work to give everyone else a basic starting point for contributing. Mccapra (talk) 04:58, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify I will go with Mccapra. Article needs more work and Draftify is the good option. BBSTOP (talk) 05:06, 8 August 2022 (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.