Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kavijanasrayam

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. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 23:38, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kavijanasrayam

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I can't figure out what this is supposed to be? A book? A collection of poems? A single poem? The article is mostly a debate over who authored the book. It doesn't explain what the book is about and how it is notable, other than it being old. Half of the article is in Telugu. Is it fiction because it involves poetry? No links to the equivalent article in Telugu. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 02:12, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 02:13, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 02:13, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 02:13, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

~~Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 02:18, 4 January 2018 (UTC)~~[reply]

Comment article was also created by a a blocked user. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 02:56, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi AngusWOOF, the references available on Google Books and the references available within the article are enough to qualify the subject over WP:GNG and even WP:NBOOK. This is a much quoted historical text (prosody). I've now given the wiki link inside the article. I do understand your point that the article needs to be cleaned up. But in my opinion, deletion is not the solution for cleaning up. This seems a Keep to me. If you agree, I'll start cleaning up the article and will make it tighter. What do you say? Thanks, Lourdes 03:25, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Would you be amenable to cleaning it up in draft? The book references aren't clear at all. It's still not clear what it is. A prosody could mean a study on poetry, setting poetry to music. So is it a book of poems? Or a single poem? AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 04:50, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Current article as is written does not provide any context or reasoning for the page to exist. The references provided are passive mentions and does not establish notability. As suggested by AgnusWOOF the article can me moved to draft or deleted. Hagennos (talk) 05:29, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It is now a basic comprehensible overview/introduction, acceptable for Wikipedia. The topic is a notable ancient work of the Telugu literature. Thanks to User:Lourdes for his/her constructive attitude - a great example of how an encyclopedist should approach problems in an encyclopedia. Vejvančický (talk / contribs) 16:27, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The WP:TNT on the article does help clarify things a little, but is it a treatise on how Telugu poetry is structured or a list of poems? Or both? Some of the references provided do not mention this particular work, but Telugu prosody in general. If there are multiple names or spellings for the work, they should be listed. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:54, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to be a collection of poems ("...Malliya Rechana, the Jaina author of the early work on Telugu metrics named Kavijanasrayam states in one of the introductory verses that he could accomplish that work with assistance rendered to him by certain Vachak-abharana..."[1]) but maybe the theory and poetry could work together in Telugu literature. I don't say the article is perfect but I think it is a good starting point providing some useful and reliable references to a reader. Vejvančický (talk / contribs) 17:10, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Angus, in my study, it comes out to be a book that tells the rules – in other words, the Metre (poetry) – of how verses should be formed in Telugu poetry. The wiki link of Metre that I've provided gives sufficient clarification on what is the meaning of these so called rules that the book is based on. Thanks, Lourdes 22:56, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This article Kavijanasrayam deserves to exist since this is the oldest available piece of Telugu literature and many poets followed this book.By referring this book,scholars such as Charles Philip Brown wrote a book in English on Telugu prosodic techniques. The techniques can be added eventually to this article by other editors.

I think the direction of the article changed because one of the editors(SubhashiniIyer) was continously disrupting the page based on these aspects.

1) Jain Origins and 2) Nativity of the poet 3) Antiquity (940 AD)

The editor(Abrahmad111) has provided groundbreaking evidences from Telugu books on the above aspects.The editor who disrupted initially is shell shocked from the past 5 months and not even a single evidence has been challenged.The prejudiced and unintellectual editor 1)cannot tolerate the fact that Jain religion Telugu literature preceded Vedic religion Telugu Literature. It is a kind of religious intolerance extended to wikipedia.2) wanted the poet to belong to her home state(province) 3) cannot tolerate any Telugu Literature to be placed before 1050 AD since she assumes that all literature started after 1050 AD only after poet Nannaya, who belonged to her home state(province) .

Now that these biases were totally disproved,we can move those aspects to the talk page or retain them in a concise form in the actual page

Telugu evidences 1 2 3

English references 4 5 6

Finally,the editor(Abrahmad111) was blocked based on only suspicion of sock puppetry but not proven.What is more important is the evidence he left.SattiPandu (talk) 18:34, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Prior to the TNT, the article was all about debating the authorship, which should have taken place on the talk page. If the debate was among scholars and not the editors, then a section summarizing the debate supported with secondary sourced news articles could be provided. But it was a complete mess at the time of the AFD. As for poets following the book, there could be a Legacy section discussing how later poets have referred to the book as a template for their writings. But at this point, it needs significant coverage WP:SIGCOV in secondary sources first to show notability. If it's indeed the oldest piece of Telugu literature, the article needs references from secondary sources to support that. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 18:48, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep If a book has survived for over a thousand years, it's notable. XOR'easter (talk) 19:30, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes ! It should have been in a talk page.Unfortunately not done because editor(SubhashiniIyer) directly put the discussion on the page.Please see the history from the start.Where as ALL scholars call it a JAIN work, she just puts her personal opinions that is NOT a Jain WORK.Where as editor(Abrahmad111) provided Central Sahitya Academy reference, P.V.P Sastry,C.P.Brown,Nidudavolu Venkat Rao,Veturi Prabhakara Sastry,Chaganti Seshayya,S.V.Rama Rao and many more references.The editor (SubhashiniIyer) wants us to believe her opinion and reject Central Sahitya Academy run by govt of India and all references which are not inline with her biased mindset...

With regards to the earliest available Telugu Literature so far.. Mallia Rec 9th century poet Malliya Rechana-First Telugu Author (940AD) , Kavijanasrayam,Vemulawada Karimnagar,

With regards to Jain origins, the English links are self explanatory.. Jainism: art, architecture, literature & philosophy Jain literature. All scholars call it a JAIN work.Show me ONE author which calls it a non-JAIN work?.Please refer the Telugu links as well.

Books won't survive for 1000 years.They are copied and copied by generation after generation. Kavijanasrayam is available in 50 copies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SattiPandu (talk • contribs) 19:34, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine if you want to add back the Jain phrase. The 50 copies needs to be sourced, but that's a later detail. The English source for C.P. Brown only uses it as a passing mention along with another work. Are there any other texts that give it significant coverage? Can you confirm from the Telugu references presented, since the English ones so far have it as passing mention? AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:59, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You have removed the earlier content and references. 40 copies are available. Please check with some one who knows Telugu Unfortunately no english ref is available for this.. Significant coverage is done in these books. The references which were again removed. At least please read the English Meta-data in the archive.org

https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.333847 Kavi Janasramamu by Malliya Rechana

Publication date 1950 Topics City Collection digitallibraryindia; texts Language Telugu

Read the english meta-data or english preface.. https://archive.org/stream/kavijanaashrayam020695mbp#page/n3/mode/2up

Kavijanaashrayamu-Chandashastramu by Jayanthi Ramaiah

Publication date 1932 Publisher ANDHRA SAHITYA PARISHATH Collection universallibrary Contributor SRI KRISHNA DEVARAYANDRA BHASHA NILAYAM Language Telugu SattiPandu (talk) 20:15, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't removed it. Perhaps it was Lourdes after the TNT? AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 23:19, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, I'm convinced there is now enough significant coverage on the book. The preface was helpful and should be integrated into the article. We can continue improvements on the article at the talk page. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 23:38, 4 January 2018 (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.