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.
RL0919 (
talk) 13:04, 11 January 2019 (UTC)reply
This article fails to establish the notability of it's subject, as almost all of the sources are primary ones. Furthermore, the article has had this problem, among others, since 2012. Anything useful here could be moved to the article on
Kemetic Orthodoxy. ―
SusmuffinTalk 02:03, 4 January 2019 (UTC)reply
delete No significant independent coverage to meet the GNG and no indication of being notable as an author, scholar, or religious leader.
Sandals1 (
talk) 18:27, 8 January 2019 (UTC)reply
Delete per above no independent coverage to meet
WP:GNGReddragon7 (
talk) 11:39, 9 January 2019 (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.