Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Aart Juriaanse


 * 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. --Saroj Uprety (talk) 05:20, 26 May 2023 (UTC)'''.

Aart Juriaanse
Lack of notability. Having searched Wikidata and the English and German Wikis I find no other reference to the subject. But I would expect to find a little more somewhere. There are a couple of books, some of which are compilations. The sources used for the very long quotes appear to be non-mainstream specific sites. I was left feeling this article could be promotionalist. The creator seems to have been block as in not good standing. I am, somewhat unexpectedly in this case, being left that pending some independent reliable sources this article should be removed from the English Wikiquote. There is even a slight concern in my mind, possibly unjustified, of this being an eloborate hoax. — User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk 19:37, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Vote closes: 20:00, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete: (nominator): I believe the appropriate action is to delete, if only from a precautionary viewpoint. -- User:Djm-leighpark(a)talk 19:37, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete: (per nomination) Markjoseph125 (talk) 23:19, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep. After googling I see some (limited) notability within the field of South African spiritualist/theosophist writers, and the article is well developed. --ᘙ (talk) 14:51, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
 * @: I believe this is a case where it may be extremely careful to look for press releases in the absence of an English Wikipedia article. In the absence of an article on the English Wikipedia which would settle the matter can you explicitly fully cite your best W:WP:THREE RS.  Thankyou. -- DeirgeDeltac 00:09, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
 * I found some sources that show some notability, but nothing really impressive though. On balance, I still don't think it would hurt to keep the article. I probably won't have time to look into this again. --ᘙ (talk) 01:53, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
 * There is an additional concern : the writer seems to be known for his compilations of the writings of Alice Bailey. It should be verified if these quotes are not actually quotes by Alice Bailey, if the article is kept. --ᘙ (talk) 02:01, 18 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete Not notable person, "quotes" neither notable nor quotable. The LibraryClerk sockfarm worked a lot on theosophy, but this article is PROMO for a minor figure. HouseOfChange (talk) 09:03, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
 * 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.