Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hari Mandir (Mumbai)

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. Sam Walton (talk) 19:33, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hari Mandir (Mumbai)

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

With such a fascinating history dated back to 1950s and claims of present social service and connection with Vaishnodevi in 2006, it should not be so difficult to find online sources of this temples, if at all this all is true and notable and not just rumors. Only one passing mention in DNA and this temple seems to fail WP:GNG. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 07:06, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 07:07, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 07:08, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Just google it and you will find hundreds of links -- §§Satyamy§§ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Satyamy (talk • contribs) 14:41, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Did. All wiki mirrors. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 01:20, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sam Sailor ^Talk! 09:57, 12 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Nothing for a better article at this time. SwisterTwister talk 07:50, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —UY Scuti ^Talk 15:37, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete:The subject of the article does meet the notability criteria cited in WP:GNG.Pixarh (talk) 17:31, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - searches did not turn up enough to show it passesWP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:23, 27 November 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.