Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Early Christian prophets


 * 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 of the debate was delete. Mailer Diablo 05:57, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Early Christian prophets
This is problematic and hinges very much on the definition of "prophet". If we take the doctrinal view that the purpose of the prophets was to announce Christ then the last prophet is John the Baptist. If on the other hand we define a prophet as a leader endowed with charismatic authority then St Peter and James the Just would be "early Christian prophets" as leaders of the Jerusalem congragation. Under that definition John the Baptist would be out of place. Finally, if a prophet is anyone who has received a message from God, then the list is quite endless; many people are mentioned in the New Testament by name that received a vision or a word from God.

These points have been raised on the talk page, there has been no reply, and I'm at a loss to say where one could take the article. Besides, we have an article on Early Christianity already. Dr Zak 03:02, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Early Christianity; there doesn't appear to be any accepted definition of the parameters of this topic, therefore it's an OR selection. Z iggurat 03:29, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Where to start? Article has no real context for prophets. If this could be established, possible weak keep.  On the other hand, delete just to stop the penis waving on the talk page and redirect to Early Christianity or Church Fathers.  The irony of religious wars never ceases to amaze me. --JChap 03:35, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
 * The redirects don't really fit. No one denies that the persons listed on that page are notable figures in the early development of the Christian church. The problem is that the page is unreferenced; we don't know what definition of "prophet" was used and who considered the individuals mentioned there to be indeed prophets. Dr Zak 06:40, 29 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete Unreferenced, strongly POV, dubious categorization, disputed though meager content, utterly useless, appears to be personal vehicle for rather problemed editor. Ande B 05:08, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment if it could be refferenced to Prophet, something might be able to be salvaged from it. Jcuk 09:45, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete It's been a week since the talk page promised citations, without it is OR to group these people together. Kevin 11:05, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Crazynas 12:13, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, POV fork, no sources available, possible original research. --Ter e nce Ong 14:30, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, unsourced OR. -- M P er el ( talk 00:41, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per Terence Ong. Grand  master  ka  01:00, 30 May 2006 (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.