- 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 keep. Sandstein 18:19, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
Prakritir Pratisodh
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Prakritir Pratisodh ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No evidence of notability. There is no meaningful content in this article that cannot be covered in the article of the corresponding author. Mopswade ( talk) 08:59, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
 | User:Mopswade is a blocked sockpuppet |
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Theatre-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 12:11, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 12:11, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
- Delete. The article does not even claim notability. It merely says that the play exists. --
Ssilvers (
talk) 18:24, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
- @ Ssilvers: I'm not sure what "claiming notability" would look like exactly—few of our article say "x is notable because..."—but I think the quotation from Tagore that I've added to the lede, on the significance of the play within his oeuvre, might address this concern. – Arms & Hearts ( talk) 21:40, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
- Keep. Point #5 of WP:BK is clearly met: Tagore is a Nobel laureate and arguably the most significant figure in Indian literature. That criterion doesn't require that we have articles for every book he ever wrote, but those, such as this, where a measure of sourcing can be found should certainly be kept. The sources currently in the article, all of which are high-quality academic books, may well also be sufficient to satisfy WP:GNG and point #1 of WP:BK. It strikes me as likely that sources in Indian languages, which I'm not able to find as I only speak English, will also exist. Given Tagore's prolific career, it isn't reasonable, as the nominator seems to suggest, to discuss each of his works in his article. – Arms & Hearts ( talk) 20:35, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
- Delete point 5 needs to be scapped if it justifies keeping an article that tells us nothing as this one does.
John Pack Lambert (
talk) 18:12, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
- @ Johnpacklambert: I've expanded the article somewhat, though it's still a stub (someone with access to the full Bhattacharya chapter could expand it further, I think). You're of course entitled to still feel it's non-notable, but it no longer "tells us nothing". – Arms & Hearts ( talk) 21:40, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
- It doesn't even tell us if the play was ever produced, if so, what theatre(s) it was produced in, when, and how long the production(s) ran. If it was not produced, or produced only a few times for relatively short runs, then it should simply be mentioned in the playwright's article concerning his development as an artist. As for Rabindranath Tagore, he was not, like
Shakespeare for example, so important that he is a required subject of study for most students who read English Wikipedia, or even
Confucius who, y'know, everyone has heard of. --
Ssilvers (
talk) 01:35, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
- I beg to differ with your assessment of Rabindranath Tagore. He was every bit as important to Bengali, and wider South Asian, literature as William Shakespeare was to English literature or Confucius to Chinese. Phil Bridger ( talk) 09:57, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- It doesn't even tell us if the play was ever produced, if so, what theatre(s) it was produced in, when, and how long the production(s) ran. If it was not produced, or produced only a few times for relatively short runs, then it should simply be mentioned in the playwright's article concerning his development as an artist. As for Rabindranath Tagore, he was not, like
Shakespeare for example, so important that he is a required subject of study for most students who read English Wikipedia, or even
Confucius who, y'know, everyone has heard of. --
Ssilvers (
talk) 01:35, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sulfurboy ( talk) 14:02, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sulfurboy ( talk) 14:02, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
- Keep per WP:HEY and Arms & Hearts' excellent additions. The play has been discussed in academic literature, including an entire book chapter. As Phil Bridger says, comparing non-Western authors to Shakespeare is likely to be a sign of bias, because there aren't a lot of Bengali authors who "y'know, everyone [in the West] has heard of." — Toughpigs ( talk) 14:48, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
- Keep. There may well be works by Tagore that lack notability because they’ve never been discussed in critical literature in English, Bengali or Hindi, it they must be pretty few and far between. We may well not need an article on every single thing he ever wrote, but these will be edge cases rather than the norm. A simple BEFORE search shows an abundance of discussion of this work in RIS. Mccapra ( talk) 15:18, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
- Keep, meets WP:NBOOK (nos. 1 & 5), and WP:GNG, multiple independent sources are available (just gsearch, gbooks) that cover this play, article now contains some that reflects this. Coolabahapple ( talk) 05:03, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
- Keep meets WP:NBOOK, notable author's work. Cedix ( talk) 19:13, 3 May 2020 (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.