Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Church of Singapore


 * 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 draftify. Modussiccandi (talk) 20:21, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Church of Singapore

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

No evidence found of any notability. This is not the older, more notable organization "Catholic Church of Singapore", nor any of the other ones (Anglican, Pentecostal, Charismatic) which are also called "Church of Singapore". Sources in article are all primary, and I couldn't find other ones (but this may be due to the confusion in names), e.g. using the Chinese name in GNews gave hits, but these turn out to be for the Catholic Church of Singapore. Fram (talk) 09:22, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Religion,  and Singapore. Fram (talk) 09:22, 28 June 2022 (UTC)


 * However, when searcxhing using the English results, it returned the protestant church "Church of Singapore". https://www.cos.org.sg Josephsolomon92 (talk) 09:25, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TigerShark (talk) 02:15, 6 July 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   08:59, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete Not notable. (see below) Reflist consist entirely of primary sources; unable to locate any useful secondary sources. Re: difficulty of searching, can be disambiguated by adding their location "Marine Parade" to the search term to distinguish from others of similar name (as well as its branches), but apart from primary source(s) e.g. their own website, social media, etc. Google results consist almost entirely of maps/directions services, directories/lists and the like. By page 4, results become tangential, e.g. website of an audiovisual company showcasing as part of their portfolio the work they did setting up AV systems for the church, or the church's corporate registration info from a database. Located a news report with an incidental mention, was included in a list of places visited by people who tested COVID-positive, not relevant. Fails to meet GNG. --2406:3003:2077:1E60:C998:20C6:8CCF:5730 (talk) 21:54, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete: Sources are mostly primary sources, not enough sources to pass GNG. BEFORE search does not yield any articles. Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:48, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete: I could not find any significant coverage of the church. Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 02:24, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep gets mentioned in histories of global Pentecostalism, charismatic movement in Asia, and in Singapore, etc. I found some newspaper articles that were not on google. Chinese newspapers might have more. I've found (but not accessed) a biography of the Church's main founder in the National Library of Singapore. There are some more academic papers I've added to further reading, but haven't been able to access. I've also cleaned up the article a bit.--Jahaza (talk) 04:47, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
 * More than a page on the history of the church here which needs to be incorporated.--Jahaza (talk) 04:50, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Draftify: changing my recommendation from delete to give a chance for the article to be developed and properly sourced. Thanks to @Jahaza for initial efforts in this direction. Subject may be notable from an academic/historical standpoint as an important case study and pioneering example of Pentacostalism in Asia, but additional sources from other researchers (beyond just Allan Anderson) would be helpful to better establish that. 30 Dec 1978 Straits Times citation (part of larger section two local/lifestyle feature surveying lesser-known minority Christian groups) added by Jahaza also indicates it was worthy of coverage (albeit as a supplementary follow-up to an earlier feature about larger, more prominent groups). Mathews paper (listed in Further reading) and "More than a page on the history" (mentioned above) are unfortunately inaccessible to me. Prefer if assertions of fact in the article (e.g. "first independent charismatic local church") can be supported by secondary sources rather than primary ones, such as their self-published history, or the Goh biography (likely written and published by affiliated parties). Note there is a need to guard against COI editors, especially as a sockpuppeteer has been involved with the article as well as disruption this AfD. — 2406:3003:2077:1E60:C998:20C6:8CCF:5730 (talk) 04:36, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Draftify per IP 2406:3003:2077:1E60:C998:20C6:8CCF:5730 after some good work by Jahaza.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 02:07, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Draftify - always happy to support an alternative to deletion where one appears appropriate. MaxnaCarta (talk) 08:58, 24 July 2022 (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.