Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Muni Mohjit Vijayji (2nd nomination)

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:17, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Muni Mohjit Vijayji

Muni Mohjit Vijayji (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Poorly sourced article about a niche religious figure. Only one in-depth reference – a 2003 press article in the Gujarati language (a copyvio scan is on Commons); all the remaining references are at best passing mentions of the subject. The disciples / religious community he left behind doesn't appear too numerous or active, either, at least judging from its Facebook page. All in all, this looks like one of a myriad of gurus found across India at any time who preach to their small following; and not a person with an encyclopaedic notability. — kashmīrī ^TALK 20:52, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Religion and India. — kashmīrī ^TALK 20:52, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Per nom. Poor and unreliable sources. One or two reliable source do not have coverage to warrant notability. Sources that cover younger generation or an IITian who gave up their career for Jain vow of renunciation does not help either. The religious figure is minor to unknown even in media and simple search on Google. RangersRus (talk) 13:36, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, Soft Deletion is not an option here due to a previous AFD on this article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:08, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comments. The sourcing is all over the place - some good, some terrible. It's almost enough for
  WP:TNT. Bearian (talk) 23:50, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete: Based on my checking, I found nothing but unreliable sources and some reliable ones that lack the in-depth coverage needed to establish notability. The subject fails to meet
  WP:GNG. GrabUp - Talk 16:36, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete per nom lacks indepth coverage.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 19:24, 21 May 2024 (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.