Talk:Christadelphian Support Network

> An organization is generally considered notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. Trivial or incidental coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not sufficient to establish notability. All content must be verifiable.<

The Christadelphian Support Network (and under that title "Christadelphian Care Group" "Christadelphian Caring Network" should have no difficulty meeting this criteria. However given the aim/focus of the group it is inevitable that most "reliable, independent secondary sources" will consist of Christadelphian publications such as The Christadelphian Magazine, Birmingham, England, Christadelphian Tidings, Detroit, USA, Christadelphian Lampstand, Adelaide, Australia, and so on. A search for the exact phrase "christadelphian care group" on Google shows varies references on webpages, but does not show up the references on these magazines since they are not online. In ictu oculi (talk) 05:17, 24 December 2009 (UTC)


 * None of the cited hits meet the requirements of WP:RS or WP:INDY.  ttonyb  (talk) 05:19, 24 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes you are correct on those hits, as I said, the main references to these groups are in printed materials within the group, or, naturally, listings in various local government organisitions where the local organisations are (as is necessary these days) assessed and registered. I probably made a mistake in making the page about one registered organisation, rather than as a trend/change in the denomination and the formation of several groups in different countries. I am currently taking advice. I still request you hang on, since the development of these groups reflects an cultural and organisational change within the grouping which has not had a representative academic study since 1961 and the change which these "Care Groups" tipify is a departure from what is recorded in available literature........ however I'm taking advice on whether this should be covered in more detail in the main Christadelphians page.In ictu oculi (talk) 06:23, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

There's no credible assertion of notability sufficient to survive a speedy deletion under criteria A7. However, rather than delete the article, the sensible solution seems to be to redirect to the main article. Content in this article is available in the history should a merge be needed. Ged UK  17:07, 24 December 2009 (UTC)