Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Church of Epiphany


 * 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.  Sandstein  15:39, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

Church of Epiphany

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

unsourced article, a cut and paste move from Draft:Church of Epiphany. No indication of meeting WP:GNG. Google searches not finding any WP:significant coverage. noq (talk) 13:43, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 13:47, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions.  PA TH   SL OP U  13:48, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 13:53, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 14:04, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete There are hundreds of thousands of Roman Catholic church buildings in the world. Obviously some of them are notable, but most aren't. How is this church notable? Is it noteworthy for its age? its architectural value? Can't find any evidence this particular church is special. SJK (talk) 12:30, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment. If it dates from 1715 then it's most certainly notable. If it mostly dates from 1930 then it probably isn't. We need more information. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:04, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   20:45, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete Wikipedia should not have articles without sources.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:50, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete -- it looks a very NN church. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:46, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - the article is unsourced, due to its common name it's difficult to source, and according to the diocesan website, it's not notable, see . Bearian (talk) 21:22, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
 * That's not actually the diocesan website, this is. But, anyway, the actual diocesan website contains no indication this church is in any way special either. This is just parish church number 62 out of 117, with no sign this church is any more significant than the other 116. SJK (talk) 21:44, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete since subject fails all relevant criteria for Wikinotability, i.e. WP:GNG, WP:NCORP, WP:RELIG/N, and so on. -The Gnome (talk) 12:59, 26 April 2019 (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.