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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 07:47, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mooji[edit]

Mooji (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Completing nomination for 81.131.106.188 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), who wrote: This is a non notable individual who hasn't done anything notable. The fact that the article even says that "his brand of enlightenment is merely a psychological sense of enlightenment to ensure a livelihood" that this Wikipedia article is being used to legitimise their own business. ansh666 19:08, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:18, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:18, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Caribbean-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:20, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose - sounds like a personal aversion towards the subject. NB: the quote of criticism above comes from a webforum...; I've removed it. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 00:25, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose - The subject in the article is very well known by many. Notability including the large gatherings usually held weekly. The original complaint content, "his brand of enlightenment is merely a psychological sense of enlightenment to ensure a livelihood" does not appear to be present in the article. On one social media network alone, the group has approximately 202,000 subscribers. ^[1] User88392838 18:44, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose - the individual is notable in his domain. He was included in the Watkins' list of the 100 Most Spiritually Influential Living People in 2012-2018. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7] Sogras (talk) 01:51, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment—I've found one source that looks like it might count towards Wikipedia policies on WP:SIGCOV, however, it was the only that I found. Keep !voters are encouraged to present more sources if possible, as notability guidelines require multiple substantial mentions (an article or several paragraphs, not few sentences or a list entry) in independent, reliable sources (not interviews or self published sources like blogs or youtube). If anyone can cite the three best sources, that would be very much appreciated. Thanks!​​ — Alpha3031 (t • c) 12:53, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Alpha3031, since there's just one source. The keep votes by the SPAs should be ignored. wumbolo ^^^ 16:20, 25 August 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.