The result was Keep as Sri Rajarajeswari Peetam (already merged). Not eligible for speedy deletion, as such, discounted. — MaggotSyn 13:38, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Non-notable temple, fails WP:ORG, WP:V. Only 19 Google hits, including this article, the temple's website, and so on. No reliable sources proffered or seemingly extant. RGTraynor 07:29, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
*Speedy delete Non notable with no reliable sources, which has been very difficult given the holiness factor... Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 21:17, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
*Delete A passing mention in a reliable source, or two, is a much better argument than holiness. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 12:08, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
*Weak delete Part of the subject of one study, but aside from this; there is little to no scholarly attention and the article is not the subject of significant media attention. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 15:00, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep due to the importance it gives to the Srividya worshiping society, that is not very big as it is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.236.195.240 (talk) 19:40, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]