Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matthew Mankuzhikary
No reference in Wikipedia, 1 Google hit. Looks like vanity by some descendant. JoaoRicardo 05:38, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- I get more google hits than that jeez. Delete for vanity. [[User:Consequencefree|Ardent†∈]] 05:44, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Keep This is a case where the number of Google hits is absolutely meaningless. His language is Malayam and his area of influence was a part of India that doesn't have a lot of Internet usage. The article itself, if accurate, establishes notability. He wrote lots of books and was a popular speaker at spiritual retreats. That's good enough for me. --LeeHunter 23:49, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Delete, not notable, possible vanity. Megan1967 00:05, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Vanity? Where do you folks see "vanity" in this article? We've got hundreds, if not thousands of articles about people who did nothing but write one book, played one season in an NFL club, or were a fictional character on one episode of the Simpsons. This guy wrote a bunch of books and was an influential religious figure for 70 years. --LeeHunter 01:34, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Well those articles should be made FvD candidates then if you dont think they did anything. He may or may not have written a "bunch" of books but they still do not make this person noteworth. Megan1967 00:36, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Neutral for now....if anyone could find more information, that would be helpful.. Tim Rhymeless (Er...let's shimmy) 03:22, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Neutral. Could be a merger into Bishop Sebastian Mankuzhikary. Would like to know more. --JuntungWu 05:27, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Delete, tribute. Wyss 22:44, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Vanity by genealogical proxy? Nothing here to establish notability, though possibly notable. Weak delete, subject to change if notability can be demonstrated. Lots of folks have written books but don't deserve an encyclopedia article. -- Jmabel | Talk 00:46, Jan 15, 2005 (UTC)
- Keep the article or at the very least merge whatever is useful with Sebastian Mankuzhikary, provided that article is kept. If the article is deleted, Matthew may possibly still deserve an article of his own in the future, and meanwhile the present text could perhaps be moved to the talkpage of Sebastian M:s article. If Matthew was a significant person in his own cultural and religious context, which does not seem unlikely, this would (I think) make him as notable as many of the pornstars, baseball players or fictional characters from TV-shows already having articles on Wikipedia. / up+land 12:34, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Edited: changed my vote to keep above. / up+land 00:59, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- I searched the Library of Congress catalogue for the name Mankuzhikary and was directed to an entry on one book by Matthew, where the name is transcribed from Malayalam as M¯atyu Manku_likkari. One book doesn't make him notable, but I can imagine that even the LoC is less than complete when it comes to religious literature in Malayalam. (It also illustrates the transcription and searching problems involved.) The National Library of India does not appear to have an online catalogue (at least I couldn't locate it on their website). / up+land 22:56, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Keep and collect updated information on him from Kerala Catholic Church. You may get proper information from [1] The congregation he co-founded working for the down-trodden in many countries of the world. You can enquire and verify it. He led thousands into mental and spiritual happiness. Beware of geographical and cultural biasHe died at the age of 93 on 2nd January 2003. He was the Guru of 1000+ Catholic priests. Also he led a saintly life. Anybody interested can verify the facts.
Keep if the information in the article is correct. This is one case where internet sources are likely to be unhelpful. The Steve 11:51, Jan 16, 2005 (UTC)
- Keep if the article is correct (but some kind of attempt at verifying the information and possibly include a bibliography would be appropriate). An author of several books and articles should normally be considered notable. As mentioned above, we have many articles of people that have achieved far less. Not to mention the Pokemon characters... Alarm 12:48, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Keep, As per Problems that may require deletion at Deletion policy I dont see any reason to delete this article.
- No reference in Wikipedia, how do you expect a reference if you start deleting articles and scare away new authors, we should have educated the original author to wikify the article. Also please spend time to contribute to articles than delete.
- Google hit should not be considered on this article, this is about a person who may have died before www (as DOB in 1909), lived/lives in Kerala, not a politician or a film star.
- vanity by some descendant - if it was a relative then there would have been more contents. I believe it is by somebody who was influenced by Bishop Sebastian Mankuzhikary, and that should be OK.
- This persons main work is not literature, it is his community work.
~ Bijee 23:46, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks for your input, Bijee. I strongly agree that references from other Wikipedia articles is a particularly weak argument when it comes to underrepresented cultures or geographic areas; it serves to conserve an already existing systemic bias. I hope that we will get more from Kerala. I wouldn't mind seeing lists and, when possible, biographies of all bishops from all dioceses of the Syro-Malabar Catholic Church, just like there are redlinked lists of all bishops of English dioceses from the 7th century until today (and for that matter all important leaders in other religions in the area as well). But Wikipedia needs more editors who know the area and the language. / up+land 00:59, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
end moved discussion