Deletion of Maheswaram Temple (2nd nomination)

Comment: per . I actually think there's an outside chance that this is a notable topic. The lingam received some attention (see https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/kochi/chenkal-set-to-be-home-to-countrys-largest-shivalingam/articleshow/66489669.cms here from the ''Times of India''). Assuming in good faith that at least one or two of the poorly-formatted print sources referenced in the current article actually has something germane to say about the temple in general (but see below), there's ''probably'' enough to build a legitimate article. What we have here, however, isn't it, and isn't salvageable. It conflates mythology and doctrine with history, is so dubiously referenced as to render ''any'' of the text questionable, and has significant passages that are on the whole barely comprehensible. Also, I believe that at least some of the print sources are being used in ways that do not support the provided claims; ''Glimpses of Architecture in Kerala Temples and Palaces'' is available via Google's frustrating Snippet View, but that's enough to determine that the word "Maheswaram" does not appear in the text; I suspect the book actually describes an architectural style, which is then attributed to this temple here via original research. And so for those several reasons, even ''if'' the temple is a notable topic, this article is so badly non-compliant that we're better off without it
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Blow it up and start over (WP:TNT)