Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Devachan

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 keep. Tone 11:19, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Devachan

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

This is a Blavatsky neologism and consequently a content fork of Helena Blavatsky. Wikipedia does not benefit from every word made up by Blavatsky having its own article page. Ash (talk) 12:33, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Spirituality-related deletion discussions. -- Ash (talk) 12:35, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It's a term used by a large number of published authors, not just Blavatsky as the GBooks hits clearly show. It's also not a content fork and more than heaven is a content fork of Bible. Edward321 (talk) 00:44, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Timotheus Canens (talk) 02:10, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Paranormal-related deletion discussions. -- Ash (talk) 02:36, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. -- Ash (talk) 02:37, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per previous poster. __meco (talk) 09:16, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep is a notable term with regular use. jackson5alive (talk) 09:22, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP:NOT makes it pretty clear that Wikipedia is not a dictionary of neologisms. Simonm223 (talk) 16:46, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have added an explanation of this concept from the perspective of anthroposphy also. __meco (talk) 15:21, 15 January 2010 (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.