Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Celebration Covenant Church


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   delete. TravellingCari 02:38, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Celebration Covenant Church

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable church; borderline advertising. justinfr (talk/contribs) 01:36, 14 September 2008 (UTC) 'Celebration Covenant Church in Frisco, Texas, recently completed the construction of a new facility that is on the cutting edge of media presentation for worship.', Media Merge, Inc http://www.mediamerge.com/projects.php?id=11
 * Keep I created the article.  Celebration Covenant Church is notable for leading change and innovation in church media.

Celebration Covenant Church is notable in Frisco, Texas. It is one of the largest and fastest growing churches in the city. 'The Most Creative Place In The Universe', The Frisco Enterprise, May 2005 http://www.celebrationcovenant.com/D_Highlights/cccnews/news200705.asp

Celebration Covenant Church is currently building it's second phase building - the Cathedral of Frisco. 'The Cathedral of Frisco', Star Community Newspapers http://www.scntx.com/admarket/ads/10105446/   pepegatorPepegator (talk) 17:36, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, I have to disagree. To meet WP's notability criteria it has to have received significant coverage in reliable sources. I don't believe the ones you've listed qualify, for the following reasons: This reference is from the site of the company that designed the sound system, this reference doesn't show up for me, but appears to be an ad. It's also unclear what the purpose of this article is. It reads like adcopy, and I couldn't find it on the newspaper's website to confirm one way or the other. justinfr (talk/contribs) 17:46, 14 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete This is an article that justs promotes some entity and is not encyclopedic, if I am not wrong I think it was speedy deleted already. Brilliant trees (talk) 17:43, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
 * It was, under WP:CSD. The article I read suggested membership in the thousands, which I thought was at least a claim of notability and therefore made it ineligible for A7. I considered WP:CSD too, but thought it might be less contentious to just do it this way. justinfr (talk/contribs) 17:49, 14 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your feedback and info. Correct - The first article was deleted. It was deleted before any issues with the article could be assessed and addressed.  This second article was posted which included references and better formatting. Our intention is to create a relevant article. We are not attempting to just promote or advertise.Pepegator
 * Thanks for your reply. I agree your intentions appear good, but the problem--in my opinion--isn't the tone of the article, it's that its subject doesn't meet notability guidelines. I've tried, but I cannot find any reliable sources covering the church (search results). You may find it helpful to read the guidelines at WP:CHURCH, which is what I'm basing my analysis on. justinfr (talk/contribs) 19:42, 14 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep Article relates to another article on WikipediA site  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frisco,_Texas  pepegator  —Preceding undated comment was added at 19:06, 14 September 2008 (UTC).
 * Please only "vote" once. This makes it easier on us when we go to close the discussion. Thanks. Hers fold  (t/a/c) 23:27, 18 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  00:04, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  00:05, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hers fold  (t/a/c) 23:27, 18 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep or merge -- I have little idea whether this is a notable church or not. However the article lacks WP:NPOV and reads like an WP:ADVERT.  I would suggest that if it is not notable enough to be retained, a shortened version should be merged to the article on Frisco, as a local facility.  In any event the excessive hype of the churhc must go.  Peterkingiron (talk) 14:27, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - no reliable sources - one cite is to their own website, another to a "community" newsletter type of periodical, the third can not be ascertained. Bearian (talk) 18:32, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:53, 23 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete Non noteable as above Politics n such (talk) 06:22, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete No substantial coverage in sources. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 15:20, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Non-notable with no substantial coverage. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 20:17, 27 September 2008 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.