Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Durga Chalisa

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. Missvain (talk) 19:52, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Durga Chalisa

[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)

PROD removed by author. Some sources exist, it is a popular hindu prayer, but this violates WP:INDISCRIMINATE as it is simply a copy/paste of the untranslated prayer lyrics. Polyamorph (talk) 16:02, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:21, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:22, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:22, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I am not the author of the page. I moved it from the draftspace where it was moved from mainspace because it didn't have any sources. Also wanted to give reference of Hanuman Chalisa - a similar prayer for a different god. This page has potential to be elaborated as broad Hanuman Chalisa. We can perhaps draftify again. Won't be in favor of deletion.

Palmsandbeaches (talk) 05:09, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WP:WHATABOUT is a weak argument here, the important thing is whether sources exist which would allow this to be expanded sufficiently beyond a simple listing of the verse. Some sources exist sure, but I can't find any which provide any real in depth coverage. I would support a re-draftification if users can demonstrated in-depth sources exist and a willingness to work on it (pointless re-drating if it isn't then worked on as will be automatically deleted in time anyway). Polyamorph (talk) 09:43, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete there are not sources giving indepth enough coverage to justify an article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:29, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Well, there are multiple books about the verse [1], I think particularly this one is more relevant maybe [2]. Now that being said, there are no sources to add more information about let's say - history, who wrote it, how it became popular etc. So even if I will work on it, the best I would be able to do is add the Hunterian transliteration and then actual translation in English. If that's acceptable, draftify it and I will work on it. otherwise, delete.

Palmsandbeaches (talk) 06:43, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. What is the reason for a separate article, even though this is a known verse??? Kolma8 (talk) 12:44, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Could not find much to support any form of notability. Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 16:10, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - this completely fails everything that is outlined in the first 3 paragraphs of WP:LYRICS. Also, this completely and utterly fails WP:GNG and does not benefit Wikipedia in any way. Spiderone 17:36, 7 December 2020 (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.