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.
promotional nonsense. Supported by dodgy references
Rathfelder (
talk) 22:30, 25 July 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete There's a lot going on here, including
wp:fringe. Although, perhaps if my past life were karmic-ly healed, I'd be more sympathetic. No reliable sources, and openly promotional.
LaMona (
talk) 21:52, 31 July 2016 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 03:40, 1 August 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete: Despite the Economic Times piece on women claiming to have special healing powers and coverage of the two actors present at her book launch (apparently "elated" to be part of the event, no less), I am not seeing
reliable evidence of
notability. If the launch-publicity coverage was to be considered as substantial (contrary to my opinion), then there is a
WP:TNT consideration, as the vast majority of the article is non-encyclopaedic.
AllyD (
talk) 08:31, 2 August 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete I did run a couple of searches, but Nom pegs it. Nice work spotting and bringing this hers.
E.M.Gregory (
talk) 17:31, 5 August 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete -- non notable subject.
K.e.coffman (
talk) 21:18, 6 August 2016 (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.