- 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. Mkativerata (talk) 23:31, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Aurakisene (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable, non-verifiable. Zero ghits on Books, Scholar, News; just three on WWW. Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not for things made up one day Sergeant Cribb (talk) 20:12, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Buddhism-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 17:30, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - Unless I'm missing it, none of the external links even menition "Aurakisene". Notability has not been established. - SudoGhost™ 01:40, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Also please note that there are two redirects, Aurakisene Buddhism and Aurakisena, that should be deleted as well. - SudoGhost™ 16:09, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Also Aurakisena Buddhism with an a.Sjö (talk) 16:41, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, probably a hoax and at the very least not notable.Sjö (talk) 16:04, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. No notability-establishing coverage available in article or basic source review, apparently WP:MADEUP. —chaos5023 (talk) 04:29, 8 July 2011 (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.