Talk:Peter Heier

Merger proposal
I looked over the admittedly comparatively few sources I had available on the subject of Christianity in China yesterday, as well as a few sources on exorcism, and find that the subject is apparently not discussed in regards to any other subject. On that basis, I propose that the extant material be merged into the List of exorcists, which seems to me to be the most directly relevant target page. John Carter (talk) 17:23, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

I disagree that this article should be merged with a list. A list is just that, a list. In fact, if a person is included on a list without an artcle the person will most likely be removed from the list. The information included here in this article is of interest, it is factual and it is on a person who took part in an important event that was reported in an erly 20th Century writing which helped spread a story on exorcism to a modern audience. As such I believe that this article is warranted. Perhaps in future when more information is made available the article can be updated and enhanced. Dwain
 * The claim of notability here seems to be serving as an exorcist. I don't think this meets WP:Notability (people) since the List of exorcists article states that prior to the Second Vatican Council, every priest would have received this title, so it can't be claimed as a "significant award or honor". I don't think Dwain's claims of an "important event" "which helped to spread a story of exorcism" is substantiated by the citations: The first being a footnote list; the second being a Vatican "Imprimatur" publication which fails the independence requirement. There is no claim that any notable publication discussed this person, let alone this event.Dkriegls (talk) 17:06, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Every priest did not perform exorcisms. The unsourced statement from a list page that you are using as evidence for non-notability does not support your argument, especially since you are even suggesting removing the list page all together. Dwain (talk) 21:26, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
 * That is the only criterion provided for being an exorcist. I am taking the debate to the list page because any conclusion on the subject there would also apply here. If you know of another criterion for determining exorcists, I suggest you bring it up there.Dkriegls (talk) 21:42, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
 * The list page now has a more clear criterion for inclusion, but I don't think this article meets WP:Notability (people). The two issues at hand are: First, does being an exorcist meet WP:Notability (people); Second do the references used go beyond trivial coverage. Dkriegls (talk) 23:19, 9 November 2010 (UTC)