Wikipedia:WikiProject Christianity/Noticeboard
- Recent changes of Christianity-related talkpages
List of abbreviations (help):
- D
- Edit made at Wikidata
- r
- Edit flagged by ORES
- N
- New page
- m
- Minor edit
- b
- Bot edit
- (±123)
- Page byte size change
10 June 2024
- diffhist Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Catholicism 15:00 +330 Dawid2009 talk contribs
- diffhist Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Saints 15:00 +330 Dawid2009 talk contribs
6 June 2024
- diffhist Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Eastern Orthodoxy 22:37 +400 Asukite talk contribs (Notifying of requested move using rmCloser)
- diffhist Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Eastern Orthodoxy 12:20 +408 ThermoBoard talk contribs (→Improving Orthodox Church in America Archdiocese of Canada: new section) Tag: New topic
- Alerts for Christianity-related articles
Did you know
- 01 Jun 2024 – At the Name of Jesus (talk · edit · hist) was nominated for DYK by Mystery Merrivale (t · c); see discussion
- 29 May 2024 – Come, O thou Traveller unknown (talk · edit · hist) was nominated for DYK by Mystery Merrivale (t · c); see discussion
- 10 May 2024 – Xenophon of Robeika (talk · edit · hist) was nominated for DYK by Evrik (t · c); see discussion
- 09 May 2024 – AdventHealth North Pinellas (talk · edit · hist) was nominated for DYK by Catfurball (t · c); see discussion
- 08 May 2024 – Florida Hospital Oceanside (talk · edit · hist) was nominated for DYK by Catfurball (t · c); see discussion
Articles for deletion
- 08 Jun 2024 – St. James Armenian Church (talk · edit · hist) was AfDed by Pi.1415926535 (t · c); see discussion (1 participant)
- 07 Jun 2024 – Moscow United Methodist Church (talk · edit · hist) was AfDed by Newhaven lad (t · c); see discussion (4 participants)
- 07 Jun 2024 – Romy Tiongco (talk · edit · hist) was AfDed by TheNuggeteer (t · c); see discussion (4 participants)
- 06 Jun 2024 – Jonas Pilling (talk · edit · hist) was AfDed by Leonstojka (t · c); see discussion (6 participants)
- 05 Jun 2024 – James Sunter (talk · edit · hist) was AfDed by Leonstojka (t · c); see discussion (3 participants)
- 05 Jun 2024 – Traders Point Christian Church (talk · edit · hist) was AfDed by Namiba (t · c); see discussion (3 participants)
- 02 Jun 2024 – WVTN-LD (talk · edit · hist) was AfDed by Mvcg66b3r (t · c); see discussion (1 participant; relisted)
- 28 May 2024 – Craig Considine (academic) (talk · edit · hist) was AfDed by Boredintheevening (t · c); see discussion (5 participants; relisted)
- 27 May 2024 – Simon Hansford (talk · edit · hist) was AfDed by LibStar (t · c); see discussion (5 participants; relisted)
- 09 Jun 2024 – Colchester Crutched Friary (talk · edit · hist) AfDed by SL93 (t · c) was closed as keep by Crouch, Swale (t · c) on 10 Jun 2024; see discussion (2 participants)
- (13 more...)
Proposed deletions
- 08 Jun 2024 – Community Christian Church (talk · edit · hist) was PRODed by Apocheir (t · c): concern and endorsed by Infectedfreckle (t · c) on 08 Jun 2024
- 06 Jun 2024 – Koinonia Christian Fellowship (talk · edit · hist) was PRODed by Apocheir (t · c): concern
- 06 Jun 2024 – Redeemer Church (talk · edit · hist) was PRODed by Apocheir (t · c): concern
- 05 Jun 2024 – Babylon Mystery Religion (talk · edit · hist) PRODed by OhHaiMark (t · c) was deproded by GB fan (t · c) on 05 Jun 2024
- 29 May 2024 – Reformed Youth Movement (talk · edit · hist) PRODed by ForsythiaJo (t · c) was deleted
Categories for discussion
- 10 Jun 2024 – Category:Berber former Christians (talk · edit · hist) was CfDed by Marcocapelle (t · c); see discussion
- 07 Jun 2024 – Category:Former Christian creationists (talk · edit · hist) was CfDed by Smasongarrison (t · c); see discussion
- 05 May 2024 – Category:Paintings of Hebrew Bible themes (talk · edit · hist) was CfDed by Marcocapelle (t · c); see discussion
- 02 Jun 2024 – Category:Female ghosts (talk · edit · hist) CfDed by Marcocapelle (t · c) was closed; see discussion
Templates for discussion
- 08 Jun 2024 – Template:Ethel Caffie-Austin (talk · edit · hist) was TfDed by Gonnym (t · c); see discussion
Redirects for discussion
- 04 Jun 2024 – Surfjam Steve (talk · edit · hist) →Sufjan Stevens was RfDed by Yilku1 (t · c); see discussion
- 04 Jun 2024 – Rich young man (talk · edit · hist) →Jesus and the rich young man was RfDed by BD2412 (t · c); see discussion
Featured article candidates
- 30 Apr 2024 – Lewis W. Green (talk · edit · hist) was FA nominated by PCN02WPS (t · c); see discussion
Good article nominees
- 09 Jun 2024 – Charlemagne (talk · edit · hist) was GA nominated by Seltaeb Eht (t · c); start discussion
- 29 May 2024 – God Is (talk · edit · hist) was GA nominated by Kyle Peake (t · c); start discussion
- 16 May 2024 – Codex Monacensis (X 033) (talk · edit · hist) was GA nominated by Stephen Walch (t · c); start discussion
- 16 May 2024 – Codex Basiliensis A. N. IV. 1 (talk · edit · hist) was GA nominated by Stephen Walch (t · c); see discussion
- 28 Mar 2024 – Santos Passos Church (talk · edit · hist) was GA nominated by V.B.Speranza (t · c); start discussion
- 04 Mar 2024 – Robert J. McMullen (talk · edit · hist) was GA nominated by PCN02WPS (t · c); start discussion
- 06 Jan 2024 – The Chosen (TV series) (talk · edit · hist) was GA nominated by David Fuchs (t · c); see discussion
Featured article reviews
- 30 Oct 2023 – Byzantine Empire (talk · edit · hist) was put up for FA review by SandyGeorgia (t · c); see discussion
- 08 May 2023 – William Wilberforce (talk · edit · hist) was put up for FA review by Buidhe (t · c); see discussion
Requests for comments
- 05 Jun 2024 – Sutherland Springs church shooting (talk · edit · hist) has an RfC by GreenC (t · c); see discussion
Peer reviews
- 01 Apr 2024 – History of Christianity (talk · edit · hist) has been put up for PR by Jenhawk777 (t · c); see discussion
Requested moves
- 06 Jun 2024 – James Schaffer (talk · edit · hist) is requested to be moved to James Shaffer (pastor) by Jax 0677 (t · c); see discussion
- 06 Jun 2024 – Russian Orthodoxy (talk · edit · hist) is requested to be moved to Slavic Orthodox churches by Ashmedai 119 (t · c); see discussion
- 25 May 2024 – Protestant Church in Germany (talk · edit · hist) is requested to be moved to Evangelical Church in Germany by Dirkwillems (t · c); see discussion
Articles to be merged
- 10 May 2024 – Chaldean Catholics (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for merging by HurryHurrian (t · c); see discussion
- 03 May 2024 – The gospel (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for merging to Gospel by LlywelynII (t · c); see discussion
- 22 Apr 2024 – St John the Evangelist's Church, Bracebridge Heath (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for merging to Bracebridge Heath by PamD (t · c); see discussion
- 07 Mar 2024 – Scriptural Way of the Cross (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for merging to Stations of the Cross by Ericglm.4 (t · c); see discussion
- 29 Feb 2024 – Katechon (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for merging to Carl Schmitt by FatalSubjectivities (t · c); see discussion
- 16 Feb 2024 – Servetism (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for merging to Michael Servetus by Moriwen (t · c); see discussion
- 07 Feb 2024 – Churches of Christ Uniting (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for merging to Churches Uniting in Christ by Moriwen (t · c); see discussion
- 02 Feb 2024 – Deanery of Christianity (Exeter) (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for merging to Archdeaconry of Exeter by Moriwen (t · c); see discussion
- 02 Jan 2024 – Logical order of God's decrees (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for merging to Ordo salutis by FatalSubjectivities (t · c); see discussion
- 30 Dec 2023 – Religious calling (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for merging to Vocation by IgnatiusofLondon (t · c); see discussion
- (4 more...)
Articles to be split
- 18 Mar 2024 – Macau Protestant Chapel (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for splitting by 188.211.233.131 (t · c); see discussion
- 23 Feb 2024 – Religion in China (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for splitting by Remsense (t · c); see discussion
- 09 Aug 2023 – Houston Christian High School (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for splitting by Wjenkins96 (t · c); see discussion
- 26 Apr 2023 – Christian liturgy (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for splitting by Scyrme (t · c); see discussion
- 24 Mar 2023 – Ukraine prison ministries (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for splitting by Wracking (t · c); see discussion
- 11 Feb 2023 – Carols by Candlelight (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for splitting by Adpete (t · c); see discussion
- 02 Jan 2023 – Prince-Bishopric of Lübeck (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for splitting by Srnec (t · c); see discussion
- 04 Jan 2022 – Arthur Neve (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for splitting by Breamk (t · c); see discussion
- 27 Aug 2021 – List of venerated Americans (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for splitting by ClueBot NG (t · c); see discussion
- 20 Jun 2020 – St Cuthbert's Church, Edinburgh (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for splitting by CPClegg (t · c); see discussion
Articles for creation
- 07 Jun 2024 – Draft:St. Michael's Roman Catholic Cathedral, Kodungalloor (talk · edit · hist) has been submitted for AfC by Aldrin Sojan P (t · c)
- 03 Jun 2024 – Draft:MS Ham. 78.A.5 (talk · edit · hist) has been submitted for AfC by Ellensa4 (t · c)
- 01 Jun 2024 – Draft:Christianity and artificial intelligence (talk · edit · hist) has been submitted for AfC by Jeaucques Quœure (t · c)
- 19 May 2024 – Draft:Affirming Ministries (talk · edit · hist) has been submitted for AfC by 2607:F2C0:E356:700:995C:7E79:64C4:F3E9 (t · c)
- 18 May 2024 – Draft:Remember Me (software) (talk · edit · hist) has been submitted for AfC by Bapoux (t · c)
- 17 May 2024 – Draft:Southern District Convocation Goldsboro (talk · edit · hist) has been submitted for AfC by TheEditorIAm (t · c)
- 13 May 2024 – Draft:Gaetan Roy (talk · edit · hist) has been submitted for AfC by Curry28 (t · c)
- 04 May 2024 – Draft:Joint Commission Of The Theological Dialogue Between The Orthodox Church And The Oriental Orthodox Churches (talk · edit · hist) has been submitted for AfC by Contagious Owl (t · c)
- 01 May 2024 – Draft:Porfiry Ilchuk (talk · edit · hist) has been submitted for AfC by Loganmoi21 (t · c)
- 30 Apr 2024 – Draft:Trinity United Methodist Church (Grand Island, NE) (talk · edit · hist) has been submitted for AfC by SEGACD32XMODEL1 (t · c)
- (11 more...)
- Christianity Deletion list
Christianity[edit]
St. James Armenian Church[edit]
- St. James Armenian Church (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Unsourced article with no indication of notability. A BEFORE search finds nothing but run-of-the-mill local coverage of the church, and it's not a registered historic building. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:08, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture, Religion, Armenia, and Massachusetts. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:08, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:27, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
Moscow United Methodist Church[edit]
- Moscow United Methodist Church (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This appears to be a small church with no particular claim to be notable - either because of history or current activity. Suggest delete unless someone can evidence notability Newhaven lad (talk) 17:03, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Christianity and Pennsylvania. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:06, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete not every church is notable. There is coverage of local events in the news papers and pleny of social media but no real sources to establish notabilty.— Iadmc♫talk 17:18, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete I found various books discussing the rise of Methodism in Russia but not this church in particular. Don't support redirect as specific location doesn't reflect the movement. BrigadierG (talk) 18:49, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
- @BrigadierG the church is in Pennsylvania! Look again — Iadmc♫talk 18:55, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
- Damn, how'd I miss that? It's like Category:Kiritimati all over again BrigadierG (talk) 18:59, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
- Does your !vote stay though? — Iadmc♫talk 19:04, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
- It does - I can't find any coverage of the church. BrigadierG (talk) 21:05, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
- Does your !vote stay though? — Iadmc♫talk 19:04, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
- Damn, how'd I miss that? It's like Category:Kiritimati all over again BrigadierG (talk) 18:59, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
- @BrigadierG the church is in Pennsylvania! Look again — Iadmc♫talk 18:55, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete as per nom. Hyperbolick (talk) 01:14, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 10:19, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
Romy Tiongco[edit]
- Romy Tiongco (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
The article does not meet the notability guidelines of WP:POLITICIAN TheNuggeteer (talk) 13:54, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and Politics. TheNuggeteer (talk) 13:54, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Christianity, Philippines, and United Kingdom. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:42, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. I think the two programmes on the BBC all about him and the first of these and its report his on him were what led me to start this page and think him notable enough - perhaps via general notability rather than as a politician per se. A political activist, NGO worker and then politician (Msrasnw (talk) 17:25, 7 June 2024 (UTC))
- Comment - maybe you should find more sources, only 2 out of the 7 sources work.
- TheNuggeteer (talk) 00:23, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
- If there are 2 "working" sources, that should be enough for WP:GNG. Howard the Duck (talk) 05:27, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
- One of the sources is a video source which does not work anymore, is one source okay? TheNuggeteer (talk) 05:45, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
- Our "policy" on this is WP:LINKROT, and it being dead should not be taken against the article, more so if the reference is more than a decade old.
- So no, your premise of this article having just one source doesn't hold. Howard the Duck (talk) 07:07, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
- One of the sources is a video source which does not work anymore, is one source okay? TheNuggeteer (talk) 05:45, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
- If there are 2 "working" sources, that should be enough for WP:GNG. Howard the Duck (talk) 05:27, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete I did a WP:BEFORE search outside of the sources in the article and can't find anything which suggests to me that the article passes WP:GNG. The non-working links do not necessarily suggest there was secondary coverage of him, either - the magazine just has a wordpress site and the BBC radio bit is an interview, which are not secondary. SportingFlyer T·C 17:30, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
Jonas Pilling[edit]
- Jonas Pilling (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
The justification for this subject having an article is the long-running dispute between him and his parishioners, which did attract some attention from local press at the time, but it seems that much of this content could simply be rolled into the article on St Mark's Church, Huddersfield, where he was the vicar for a number of years. It is not clear to me why Pilling himself needs an article of his own. Leonstojka (talk) 01:14, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Christianity and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:14, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. The substance of the article is bigger than Pilling himself, but he is the vehicle for the publication of that substance, because he was the subject of the event concerned. For whatever reason, he was unable to fulfil his task as a vicar in one of the most terribly deprived areas of England at the time. When the Bishop did not appear to be doing anything about this tragedy for the local poor, the local newspaper said sadly that there was much work to do (for the poor and deprived). The fact is, the Bishop left it far too long before resolving the issue for the local congregation. To understand what happened, we need the full story (as far as we can know it) of Pilling. We cannot surmise, speculate or give opinion, but what we can do is give all the facts and give the reader a chance to get a full idea of what happened. In order to give all the facts, we need the full article on Pilling. To put the whole Pilling article into the church article would be to overwhelm the latter. Besides all that, the Pilling article is in itself an interesting study on how the Anglican church dealt (or didn't deal at all) with inadequate and/or suffering priests. In this case at least, the Bishop just let it be.
- Since the severe problems began in 1905, we cannot blame the interruption of World War I for the bishop's lack of action. We cannot know why the bishop behaved like that, or exactly why Pilling behaved like that, but as the article stands, we can at least look at the facts. And the facts are important for the history of Huddersfield, for the history of the church, for the history of Anglican priests, and for the history of Pilling himself. Not all Wikipedia articles have to be about heroes and success stories. Sometimes we can learn from the mistakes of the past. One thing for sure: we should not shut our eyes to what happened in Huddersfield in Pilling's time, and nor should we actively try to minimise its importance by deleting the article and shrinking it to fit into a dusty corner of another article.. Storye book (talk) 09:21, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep I think
some attention from local press
understates it a bit. This unusual dispute received coverage in papers across the UK over a period of years - e.g. the article quotes reports in the Aberdeen Journal and The Cornishman, which certainly aren't local to Huddersfield. Merging it into the article about the church itself would make that article rather long and unbalanced. Adam Sampson (talk) 11:18, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep I think
- Keep - Pretty clearly a historical figure of some note amongst his contemporaries of 100 years ago. Passes GNG. Carrite (talk) 16:48, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per the drama described above. Hyperbolick (talk) 07:07, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - outside of the drama of the dispute between him and parishioners, which seems rather something of a tempest in a teacup, this is a mere footnote in the history of the church. The entire, laborious history is not notable enough to recount beyond the existing paragraph in the church's article (which could be expanded slightly if necessary). Outside of that dispute, he does not seem notable at all. WmLawson (talk) 00:12, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
- It is not a "tempest in a teacup", since this church scandal lasted between 1905 and 1921, with World War I in the middle, when the poor and deprived of the area really needed church charity. At that time, vicars were in charge of the charity given by individual churches, and for many hundreds of years, England and then the United Kingdom depended primarily on the Roman Catholic Church and then the Anglican Church for charity and welfare. Apart from the religious tradition of helping the poor, the local rich people felt beholden to the church for various reasons, so that the church could ask them for money to help the poor. During Pilling's employment in that Huddersfield position, that need for the church to help the poor still pertained. Because that was one of the poorest and most deprived areas of the country, Pilling's failure would have been disastrous. If the church did not help destitute people, then destitute people died - and that situation continued in that area of Huddersfield for over fifteen years, while the church authorities looked on and did nothing, in spite of newspaper comments and public knowledge across the country.
- Because this is a biography of Pilling, we can give the full facts of him and his life. Without that, and if the story were told from another perspective, his details would have to be curtailed, and he would just look blameworthy, whereas the facts tell us that the case was not that simple. The buck stopped with the bishop.
- British history is what made us what we are today. Our history, good or bad, is part of our identity. Today, history is a grown-up matter - no longer merely a list of kings and wars for schoolboys to memorise. Today, history includes social history - including the histories of ordinary working people, whose biographies symbolise the lives of all the millions of people who were here before us. Today, history helps us learn from our mistakes, and goodness knows the church needs to learn from its mistakes, where past hiring of the wrong kind of priest is now very much in the limelight. Real history needs to be understood fully in all its aspects. Storye book (talk) 08:41, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
James Sunter[edit]
- James Sunter (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Don't see how this individual is notable enough for a page, both in the general sense and in the parameters for which clerics are notable. Much of the article is unreferenced, and some of the sources at the bottom are only brief mentions. One actually focuses on the son of the subject. Leonstojka (talk) 23:48, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Christianity, England, and Australia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:05, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, Christianity, England, and Australia. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 00:09, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Canon Sunter was arguably the most important incumbent of St Paul's church (now repurposed), the third, and most central, Anglican church in Adelaide. His activities were regularly reported in Adelaide newspapers, rating over 1,000 mentions on Trove, and there may be more to find, as the illustration appears to be taken from an encyclopedia or church history. Doug butler (talk) 21:04, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
Traders Point Christian Church[edit]
- Traders Point Christian Church (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:GNG. Only one source is independent and significant. User:Namiba 14:40, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Christianity and Indiana. User:Namiba 14:40, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: First hit in Gsearch is their own website, then it's off into un-RS... The article uses primary sources now and I don't find coverage of this church. Having the fastest growing congregation in 2016 isn't terribly notable and the rest isn't helpful for notability. Oaktree b (talk) 15:26, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. There's significant coverage in a book (see Diamond, 2003), as well as in Indianapolis Monthly. The Indy Star coverage available can support facts in the article but doesn't go toward notability because (even though some is in great depth) it's generally coverage of new locations and inclusion in "fastest growing" lists that WP:ORGCRIT excludes. Even so, the Diamond book and Indianapolis Monthly piece should cross the bar. Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:20, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as per the reliable sources coverage identified above by Dclemen1971, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 18:57, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
WVTN-LD[edit]
- WVTN-LD (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Subject does not meet the GNG. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 03:58, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Christianity, and Kentucky. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 03:58, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. Let'srun (talk) 19:31, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 03:07, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
Craig_Considine_(academic)[edit]
- Craig_Considine_(academic) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I am unconvinced that the subject of this article meets the notability guidelines for academics. The article subject is a teaching professor with limited research output. Their research has not made a significant impact in their scholarly field (they seem to publish introductions for popular presses, published reviews of their other work is critical). They have not recieved a highly prestigious academic award or honor at national/internationl level. They are not an elected member of a highly selective/prestigious society. The subject does not hold a distinguished professor position or appointment at a major institution, nor have they been named chair or equivalent. The subject has not held a highest-level administrative appointment. The person appears not to have made a signifcant impact outside of academia in their academic capacity, where they are quoted in publications it is usually promotional material for one of their porjects. The subject has not been editor/EiC of a major/well-established academic journal. Other contextual clues indicate that this page exists purely as a promotional platform for the subject. There is very little activity on this page other than IP editors vandalizing the page to introduce promotional content, and then other editors removing or clarifying these edits. The creator of this page has since been banned for their promotional activities. I mean to disrespect to the subject of this article, but I struggle to see how they meet the criteria or need for inclusion on Wikipedia. There is nothing wrong with trying to boost your platform and visibility as a junior academic, but I would suggest that this is much better accomplished through a personal website and social media channels. Having a cursory glance at the department the article subject belongs to, there are many far more senior scholars among his colleagues who are not similarly represented on this site. After spending significant time trying to improve this page, I doubt that with the available material it will rise to the level of inclusion. I welcome other editors' feedback and perspectives if I have been too harsh in my judgement. Boredintheevening (talk) 15:47, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
- (correcting typo: line read "I mean no disrespect", not "I mean to disrespect") Boredintheevening (talk) 15:49, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, Christianity, Islam, Ireland, England, Massachusetts, Texas, and Washington, D.C.. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:25, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 21:20, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
- Weak keep but trim. A lecturer position at a US university is unpromising for WP:PROF notability, and his Google Scholar profile has only one publication with significant citations [1], so that leaves WP:AUTHOR as the only plausible remaining possibility. The article (in the version I checked) lists reviews in the Wall Street Journal and an academic journal, Islam and Christian–Muslim Relations, for his book People of the Book (references 11 and 12) and in Anthropology Today for his film Journey into America (reference 23). It lists a few other reviews but I am not as convinced of their reliability. My searches turned up only one more, a review in Diaspora Studies for his book Islam, race and pluralism in the Pakistani Diaspora [2]. I think that's borderline, but on the positive side of borderline. On the other hand, the article was horribly puffed up with uninteresting childhood anecdotes, unsourced claims, and the like, even after User:Boredintheevening had trimmed a lot of it. I trimmed more, but there appears to be plenty of unreliably-sourced material remaining in the "Documentary and Books" that should be cut back even more heavily. —David Eppstein (talk) 04:46, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for contributing to this discussion and for editing out some of the puff from the article. I want to defer to your experience, but reading WP:AUTHOR - the subject certainly doesn't meet bullet points 1, 2 and 4. For bullet point 3, I acknowledge there are a handful of reviews (fewer when amateur sources and promotional material is excluded) but it seems like not a huge amount to hang the existence of the article on. I'm trying to resist being overly zealous, but the whole thing strikes me as a subject that's been very committed to self promotion (especially re:COI edits on the article) and hasn't really received much recognition or attention from professional bodies and peers. Boredintheevening (talk) 07:41, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- Comment. I'm kinda in the same boat as the nominator. In that, while I'm less familiar with WP:NACADEMIC, it doesn't seem to me that the related criteria are met. While the existence of reviews in the Wall Street Journal and Middle East Monitor are possibly contributory, I'm not sure (on their own) they reach the thresholds expected by criteria 3 of WP:NAUTHOR. Personally I cannot advocate for a keep. And am left on the fence. (I would note that the bulk of the promotion added to previous versions of this article didn't appear to come from the article's creator. But from an apparent COI/SPA account which added the bulk of the largely uncited puff in Aug 2021.)
- Keep. Satisfies criterion 7 of WP:NACADEMIC as "frequently quoted in conventional media as an academic expert in a particular area." (See The Independent, New Indian Express, IBTimes, and Gulf News.) I think it could also plausibly justify WP:GNG with the WP:SIGCOV in the Houston Chronicle, Needham Times, and the discussion of his broader work in the WSJ review. Meanwhile, People of the Book would qualify as a notable WP:NBOOK on the basis of its reviews in two reliable source outlets. (Middle East Monitor is not such an outlet.) That said, this article is still overloaded with primary sources, unreliable sources, affiliated sources and needs substantial work to improve it -- but deletion is not cleanup. Dclemens1971 (talk) 10:50, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- P.S. I want to thank @Boredintheevening for your work improving the article in the face of a wave of disruptive COI edits. The article was very problematic before you turned your attention to it, and while it still needs work it's in much better shape. Dclemens1971 (talk) 11:06, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as the coverage in reliable sources identified in this discussion shows a pass of WP:GNG so that deletion is unnecessary in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 20:47, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
Simon Hansford[edit]
- Simon Hansford (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Most of the sources are not in-depth or are primary. Fails WP:BIO. LibStar (talk) 03:53, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Religion and Australia. LibStar (talk) 03:53, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:01, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:51, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - Non-notable bio which only has two sentences about his ministry. The rest is about his education and family background. — Maile (talk) 12:35, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - Notable as an important faith figure in New South Wales’ third biggest Christian denomination. All Moderators of the Uniting Church should be profiled rather than deleting them so we have record of church leadership. hSproulesLane (talk) 10:16, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- No inherent notability in his position. Where are the sources to meet WP:BIO? LibStar (talk) 16:37, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- As a well known deletionist LibStar has made his point so I hope he will allow other editors to have their say without harassing them to accept his view of a minimalist version of an online encyclopaedia … please let others contribute without your bullying. SproulesLane (talk) 09:22, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- Not bullying, merely pointing out that all biographies need sources to meet WP:BIO, which you have failed to do. LibStar (talk) 18:13, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- I’ve added references from The Sydney Morning Herald, The Guardian, The Northern Daily Leader and the NSW Government indicating his activities in resent years. SproulesLane (talk) 10:05, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for adding sources. The SMH one is a 1 line mention and not WP:SIGCOV. The NSW government one is him merely making a statement on behalf of the church and also not SIGCOV. LibStar (talk) 16:33, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
- The Guardian article does not establish notability, it is an opinion piece by Hansford and a WP:PRIMARY source. LibStar (talk) 18:03, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for adding sources. The SMH one is a 1 line mention and not WP:SIGCOV. The NSW government one is him merely making a statement on behalf of the church and also not SIGCOV. LibStar (talk) 16:33, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
- I’ve added references from The Sydney Morning Herald, The Guardian, The Northern Daily Leader and the NSW Government indicating his activities in resent years. SproulesLane (talk) 10:05, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
- Not bullying, merely pointing out that all biographies need sources to meet WP:BIO, which you have failed to do. LibStar (talk) 18:13, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- As a well known deletionist LibStar has made his point so I hope he will allow other editors to have their say without harassing them to accept his view of a minimalist version of an online encyclopaedia … please let others contribute without your bullying. SproulesLane (talk) 09:22, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- No inherent notability in his position. Where are the sources to meet WP:BIO? LibStar (talk) 16:37, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 05:24, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
Categories for discussion[edit]
- Christian religious leaders: further follow-up required, see Category talk:Religious leaders#Clergy categories