Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/God Temple


 * 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. No references discovered that would evidence notability under WP:GNG. j⚛e deckertalk 01:15, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

God Temple

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Poorly written, little context. No references for notability. Should be deleted moved to userspace. Skrelk (talk) 19:19, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
 *  Speedy delete  as copyvio: The corresponding article in the Chinese Wikipedia (see interwiki link) was deleted as a copyvio of, of which the English article is a machine translation. הסרפד  (call me Hasirpad) (formerly R——bo) 22:10, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
 * This requires closer examination; the first sentence is reproduced verbatim, but not the rest. הסרפד  (call me Hasirpad) (formerly R——bo) 22:13, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete- it is unsourced and it has no references. --74.131.177.233 (talk) 23:58, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - No way to know which temple it is, and I can't find reliable sources about any of them.  Zappa  O  Mati   01:54, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Taiwan-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 04:58, 10 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Note – Similar articles Cheng Huang Temple and Xian Ju Three Mountain Palace are also nominated see Articles for deletion/Cheng Huang Temple & Articles for deletion/Xian Ju Three Mountain Palace &#9733;&#9734; DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 05:40, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete it is unintelligible and it has no references.--Starship9000 (talk) 03:48, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
 * For reference, this article is supposed to be about the City God Temple in the Zuoying District of Kaohsiung. Uncle G (talk) 11:29, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep This is a traditional religious building, very important to the Confucian faith. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.212.29.226 (talk) 21:12, 12 January 2013 (UTC) — 150.212.29.226 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Delete. I would not rule out that a satisfactory article could be written on this subject, assuming it is a legitimate existing temple. However, this article is far from being explanatory and helpful, lacks references and does not clearly identify the subject for any reader who is not already familiar with it. Move to user space appears to be the best current option. Donner60 (talk) 21:24, 12 January 2013 (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.