User talk:Scichristian1

Speedy deletion of Sci-christianity
A tag has been placed on Sci-christianity requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Andy Dingley (talk) 00:51, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Why Delete?
The Speedy Deletion said that it is an article about a Group of People. Well aren't The Articles on Christianity,Muslims and Republicans also about People and they remain on Wikipedia. Also it stated about Why it should be on here. The church of Sci-Christianity is another Denomination of Christianity and Deserves to remain on wikipedia just as much as any other Denomination such as Protestantism or Orthodoxy. It is a Denomination of Christianity that has different Beliefs and Doctrines from Other Denominations. This Page would show those differences and Explain this Denomination.


 * I suggest we continue this over at Talk:Sci-christianity Andy Dingley (talk) 01:17, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

...or maybe not. Bit of a quick response there, given that there was a hangon and active discussion in evidence. Best raise that with the admin concerned. Anyway:

Why Delete?
The Speedy Deletion said that it is an article about a Group of People. Well aren't The Articles on Christianity,Muslims and Republicans also about People and they remain on Wikipedia. Also it stated about Why it should be on here. The church of Sci-Christianity is another Denomination of Christianity and Deserves to remain on wikipedia just as much as any other Denomination such as Protestantism or Orthodoxy. It is a Denomination of Christianity that has different Beliefs and Doctrines from Other Denominations. This Page would show those differences and Explain this Denomination.


 * Hi, thanks for responding. If this is seen as any sort of "attack" (which it isn't), then it's an attack on the quality of the article, not the subject matter itself. Please read the policies at WP:CSD and WP:NOR to see what the background is to this.


 * As far as this article shows, you yourself have very recently made two blog posts about Sci-christianity, a concept which is certainly very new. That's not enough independently verifiable background to demonstrate that Sci-christianity is a topic of sufficient notability to justify it being described in an encyclopedia. Who else is discussing it? How many other people have taken note of your new idea? WP:SOAP might explain that Wikipedia isn't just another Facebook where you can publish anything, this "anything" has to have some verifiable existence in the mind of more than one person first. Maybe it's the greatest theological idea since the Trinity, but it has to demonstrate itself first before Wikipedia. Wikipedia documents things, it isn't a mouthpiece for inventing new ones. Republicans are on here because, love 'em or loathe them, their prior existence is well documented.


 * I wish you luck with your idea and your article, but things have to have a clear independent existence before they can be written up in an encyclopedia. Andy Dingley (talk) 01:32, 22 May 2008 (UTC)