Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hillsong Church Stockholm


 * 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   merge to Hillsong Church.   A rbitrarily 0   ( talk ) 20:42, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Hillsong Church Stockholm

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Notability of this religious organization is not sufficiently asserted. Although there are secondary sources, these sources do not address the notability question. Plastikspork ―Œ (talk) 05:01, 24 November 2009 (UTC) Note Hillsong Church Stockholm is also referred to as Hillsong Stockholm in news articles not Hillsong Church Stockholm. -- Arie Scheurwater (User Page 13:52, 25 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Hillsong Church as this appears to be a chapter of it. There is no independent notability that I can find. -- Whpq (talk) 12:30, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - Sorry, but I think that it is a (not so clever) idea, because then you will also have to redirect Hillsong Church Cape Town, Hillsong Church Kiev and Hillsong Church London, because they are also chapter of Hillsong Church according to your idea. -- Arie Scheurwater (User Page 12:51, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - Actually, if the outcome of this AFD is redirection, the others should be reviewed to see if the same should apply there. However, each needs to be reviewed on their own merit and don't have any real bearing on the decision for this article. -- Whpq (talk) 12:57, 24 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep K, Plastikspork according to u what is the notable question. -- Arie Scheurwater (User Page 12:45, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - Per WP:ORG, there needs to be significant coverage. The sourcing in the article merely mentions Stockholm as one of the places where the church has expanded. Note also that this same guideline indicates that local chapters of natinal and international organisations are not usually notable indpendently unless significant coverage can be demonstrated beyond that chapters local area. None of the sourcing in the article meets these guidelines, and searching for more sources does not turn up anything that would establish the Stokholm instance of the church as independently notable. -- Whpq (talk) 12:55, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - Hey, This is from ORG


 * Organizations are usually notable if they meet both of the following standards:


 * 1. The scope of their activities is national or international in scale.
 * 2. Information about the organization and its activities can be verified by third-party, independent, reliable sources. (In other words, they must satisfy the primary criterion for all organizations as described above.)


 * 1. CHECK
 * 2. CHECK


 * Additional criteria are:


 * Organizations whose activities are local in scope may be notable where there is verifiable information from reliable independent sources outside the organization's local area. Where coverage is only local in scope, the organization may be included as a section in an article on the organization's local area instead.
 * The organization’s longevity, size of membership, or major achievements, or other factors specific to the organization may be considered. This list is not exhaustive and not conclusive.


 * Point 1. CHECK, because DAGEN is a Swedish national newspaper, SMH is the newspaper for Sydney
 * Point 2. CHECK, because they are know around the world
 * It meets the requirements -- Arie Scheurwater (User Page 13:56, 24 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment - How is the Stockholm chapter of the church international in scope? Where are the reliable sources to establish this?  How does this chapter distinguish itself from the parent organisation?  I don't see the sources establishing any of this. -- Whpq (talk) 14:22, 24 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Merge the argument is that the Dagen articles are about the Stockholm congregation, and we do have the rule WP:GNG--technically, it is just past the borderline of notability. I agree the evidence is fairly minimal, since the key reference, indicates they have only 92 members, but that was in 2006. I could find no later figures.  I think the best way to deal with the Hillsong branches is to merge the articles.  Looking at the template, I am a little concerned we are building a WW:Walled Garden.    DGG ( talk ) 01:20, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment hey yea it is true that they started of in 2006 with 92 people they where called Passion Church and changed to Hillsong Church Stockholm since then they have grown, but the numbers are not published yet. -- Arie Scheurwater (User Page 12:56, 25 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment. I just added a WSJ article as a ref.--Epeefleche (talk) 22:13, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Hey thx for your ref. -- Arie Scheurwater (User Page 14:48, 1 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Merge into Hillsong Church per WP:CLUB, "Individual chapters of national and international organizations are usually not notable enough to warrant a separate article unless sufficient notability is established through reliable sources that extend beyond the organization's local area. However, chapter information may be included in list articles as long as only verifiable information is included." Click23 (talk) 15:39, 1 December 2009 (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.