Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/D.B.T. David

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. Beeblebrox ^Beebletalks 22:29, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

D.B.T. David (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

All I could find of him online was passing mentions, and few of the sources cited appear to actually mention him. Draftified once, and moved back with the only changes made being removal of some references. Wikishovel (talk) 20:14, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Christianity, and Tamil Nadu. Wikishovel (talk) 20:14, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Dear Sir, The source for this article is from a Biographical booklet titled, "Rev. D.B.T. David: Pastor par excellence" printed by the family after his death, for local readership in Chennai, Nov 2001. The articles of Rev. David had appeared in Tamil newspapers/magazines of the print media era. Church souvenirs contain writings of others about him in Tamil, which preceded times of internet usage and digital formatting. The tribute of Bishop cited is in the YouTube video (in Tamil). There is another reference of his council membership in United Theological College. After Facebook came, some parishioners have commented positively about Rev. David, at different times in the past which are laborious to trace now. He ministered to a neglected community to whom no media or researcher or social worker or church agency engaged with as Rev. David. Therefore, his ministry is considered first of its kind. Clergymen serve the church and the public too without fanfare or promoting themselves. They shun publicity. Any good deed done for publicity will only be self-defeating. Therefore, this article about a social and spiritual transformational work deserves to be at least in a draft format or "sources to be verified" category, for the sake of future researchers. Thank you for your time. (User: Wordofguidance.) Wordofguidance (talk) 06:46, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Nothing for notability. Sourcing used in the article is almost entirely red per Cite Highlighter, so non-RS. I can't find anything about this person... The long note above mentions a book published by the family; I'd consider that a primary source and one isn't enough anyway. Non-notable religious person. Oaktree b (talk) 00:29, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - even assuming everything is true, there are zero independent, reliable sources in the article or on this page. I'm sorry. Bearian (talk) 17:23, 28 January 2025 (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.