Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mandalasana

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. Consensus here is clearly for deletion, as per Wikipedia is not a manual, guidebook, textbook, or scientific journal. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:19, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Mandalasana

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

How to do it article -- no evidence of importance except being listed along with all other yoga poses in a book DGG ( talk ) 18:11, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete As DGG says. We have something of a walled garden when it comes to yoga-related topics but this really is a step too far. - Sitush (talk) 19:56, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, it seems we have Lolasana also, which appears to have similar issues. - Sitush (talk) 20:04, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -Seems like an entire article dedicated to this subject is a little too much, it should probably have a brief description on a related yoga page instead S3venevan (talk) 05:11, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Wikipedia is not a how-to guide Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 11:55, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:00, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Buddhism-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:01, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:01, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom and WP:NOTMANUAL.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 12:30, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of asanas. No evidence of independent notability for a stand-alone article, but no reason it can't be covered in a list article. Most of the other positions on the list probably have the same issue. --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:33, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per NOTMANUAL. APerson (talk!) 13:38, 28 April 2015 (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.