Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Guild of St. Stephen


 * 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 keep. (non-admin closure) Nightfury 14:31, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Guild of St. Stephen

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I couldn't establish that it has the coverage or significance to meet WP:ORG or WP:GNG. I didn't find a suitable WP:ATD, but am open to suggestions, there may be somewhere it can be merged/redirected to? Boleyn (talk) 16:53, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment: How's this article from a late nineteenth-century glossary/encyclopedia? (Unclear if it's the same guild as the one in the article though?) I also found:
 * "The eight hundred servers of the Guild of St Stephen in their cassocks and cottas … all these led up in the most striking way to the imposing person of the Legate in his splendid Cardinal’s robes.” (599) source (Report of the 19th Eucharistic Congress, 1908)
 * "In May 1906 St Pius X gave his approbation to the canonical erection in Westminster Cathedral of the Guild of St Stephen for Altar Servers and in December of that year the Sacred Congregation of Rites made the Guild an Archconfraternity Prima Primaria, with power to affiliate to itself confraternities established elsewhere …" source (Catholics in Cambridge, 2003) — Preceding unsigned comment added by AleatoryPonderings (talk • contribs) 02:48, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 02:51, 7 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep. It seems like both sources are talking about that guild, they both talk about altar servers. The second source even talks about its founding in 1906 by Hamilton Macdonald, and the Convent of the Sacred Heart, and the 1936 expansion to Cambridge by Pope Pius. I think that source verifies the article pretty well. Awsomaw (talk) 14:29, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep as per the coverage in multiple reiable sources identified above so that deletion is no longer necessary in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 18:40, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 23:54, 11 July 2020 (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.