Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christology

was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was

Christology
This article is an exact copy of a section in Christian views of Jesus, but not in prose. CheeseDreams 15:17, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete then (and only then) redirect CheeseDreams 15:14, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * Keep. I fail to see why this is being listed on VfD. Can CheeseDreams please give a reason in line with the Deletion policy? Personally, I think that there is considerable room for expansion - I think a better approach would be to summarise Christology in Christian views of Jesus and keep Christology as a separate article. However, at the very least Christology needs to be kept as a redirect to Christian views of Jesus. It should not be deleted, as people may well search for this term. --G Rutter 16:41, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * The Christology article IS a summary. The Christian views of Jesus version (which is word for word identical, just rearranged into prose) is difficult to summarise any further. CheeseDreams 18:56, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * I'm glad to see you've changed your vote to redirect. Admins- as the proposer is no longer voting for deletion, and hasn't given a reason in line with the Deletion Policy is there any way we can take this page off VfD (as it's cluttered enough already)? --G Rutter 20:54, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * No, I think the page should be deleted. A redirect should be put in its place after this has happened. CheeseDreams 23:24, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * You still haven't given a reason in line with the Deletion policy why you think this page should be deleted in the first place. --G Rutter 15:21, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * Keep. First, the Christology article is NOT an exact copy of the section in Christian views of Jesus. That section has more prose, but at a glance appears to omit many of the topics here. Second "Christian views of Jesus" is not the same thing as "Christology", and "Christology" already has many other articles linking to it. Third, the reason there is a similar section in Christian views of Jesus is that Cheesedreams attempted to move it to that article and edit it there, without discussion on either the Christology page or further discussion on the Wikiproject:Jesus page where he first suggested deleting it. In that discussion, he indicated that at the time he didn't really understand what christology is. The article may need expansion or other improvements, but it needs to be its own article. Wesley 20:41, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * I should add that CheeseDreams added the request for expansion to the Christology article a couple weeks ago. That seems like the better way to go. Wesley 20:52, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * No-one expanded it. So im guessing there is nothing more to add. And, until you cut the Christian views article earlier this evening, it was an exact word-for-word copy, just re-arranged. CheeseDreams 23:24, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * P.s. read the Wikiproject Jesus page and you will find it was Ben Standevan who suggested the change, actually, so don't go making Ad Homina. CheeseDreams 23:24, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. A condensed formulation at Christian views of Jesus currently bears a notice of fuller treatment at Christology. Conversely, on another occasion, dividing a "too long" article would be urged instead! Keep it as it now stands, and make sure that the article Christology has the complete version. --Wetman 23:30, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * I can guarentee that the formulation at Christian views of Jesus is not condensed, and in fact contains slightly more words. There are absolutely no more words or information at Christology. CheeseDreams 23:41, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * Keep, part of a vandalism spree. --[[User:Eequor| &#5339;&#5505;  [[Image:Venus symbol (blue).gif|&#9792;]] [ &#5200; ]]] 01:20, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Now that is just hypocracyCheeseDreams 01:32, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * Keep it. &mdash;[[en:RaD Man|RaD Man (talk)]] 03:24, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. This article can be expanded to something which can differentiate it from Christian views of Jesus in a significant way. Perhaps even Eastern Orthodox Christology, Calvinist Christology, Mormon Christology, etc. Fire Star 06:00, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. It's a valid area of Christian theology. --Idont Havaname 18:47, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Wikipedia drinking game: every time CheeseDreams lists something inappropriately on VfD or ViP, or has something s/he wrote listed inappropriately on either, take a shot.  -Sean Curtin 22:54, Nov 28, 2004 (UTC)
 * So how many more do I need to list before you have a fatal dose of alcohol? CheeseDreams 00:50, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * Keep. Valid topic.  Antandrus 03:54, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Christology is a valid and important topic of Christianity! What the heck is this doing on VfD?! - Ta bu shi da yu 06:37, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Merge/redirect to Christian views of Jesus, or vice versa. Doesn't matter which way. Topics pretty much identical. --Improv 06:41, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. It is a part of theology.Roscoe x 09:34, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * For the love of God, keep. --[[User:GRider|GRider\talk]] 20:55, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * If Jesus is God, then isn't that Homoeroticism ? CheeseDreams 21:43, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * Keep, christology is a completely legitimate subject that needed an article on this encyclopedia. -- Crevaner 10:09, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep - This is an encyclopedic subject! -- Old Right 11:41, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep - Not the same thing as Christian views of Jesus, and has potential for major expansion. Mpolo 20:54, Dec 3, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep I think it strange for CheeseDreams to insist that it be deleted and then redirected. Wants to remove the edit history?Pedant 15:55, 2004 Dec 4 (UTC)
 * No, because G Rutter wrote "Admins- as the proposer is no longer voting for deletion, and hasn't given a reason in line with the Deletion Policy is there any way we can take this page off VfD" which I felt distorted my opinion.CheeseDreams 18:08, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like other '/delete' pages is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.