Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Isaiah 45

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was delete. Smoddy (Rabbit and pork) 21:35, 3 May 2005 (UTC)

Isaiah 45
Just a copy of the text of Isaiah chapter 45, no commentary at all. DopefishJustin (&#12539;&#8704;&#12539;) 00:15, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, no need for transwiki. This appears to be a direct copy of Wikisource's KJV Isaiah chapter 45. android&harr;talk 00:34, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, this article has no commentary and thus can be distinguished from articles on verses from the bible. Such articles were discussed in February during the Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/John 20:16 debate.--AYArktos 01:45, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment. A scan of other Christian Bible topics shows that the articles are analytical rather than simple quoted text. In this respect, deletion is consistent with the current structure.  Many Bible related pages provide external links to verbatim chapter and verse text, which is useful to readers.  That was missing on the main Isaiah page but I've fixed that.Tobycat 01:55, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * analysis not on Isaiah page but at Book of Isaiah--AYArktos 02:20, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * A User has been posting these Bible passages, which I've been speedy deleting. They're not even appropriate for Wikisource or Wikibooks.  Delete.  RickK 05:42, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * Wikibooks has a bookshelf of Annotated works, such as The Annotated Constitution of the United States, and Wikisource has various Bible translations at Religious texts. Uncle G 13:06, 2005 Apr 27 (UTC)
 * But this isn't annotated. RickK 22:20, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, unnecessary duplication. Megan1967 06:09, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, an exact copy of a bible verse isn't an article, nor a list or a category and therefore, not encyclopedic. Mgm|(talk) 11:04, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * The article even has a Wikisource link, although it points to the wrong place. (I suspect that the tag applier meant , but that is, as pointed out above, unnecessary.) As the Wikisource article points out, there are copyright restrictions on the King James translation of the Bible. Delete. Uncle G 13:06, 2005 Apr 27 (UTC)
 * Delete, unnecessary duplication. The analysis should be included in the Book of Isaiah. --Eleassar777 19:15, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * God did not create light, for He is light. It was the primeval darkness which He created in order to have a division between day and night. 'Evil,' as used here, refers to evil of a physical nature (storms), not moral evil. Do you get what I'm saying? Oh well, never mind. Delete ---Isaac R 22:38, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. No commentary at all.--Prem 05:55, May 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Anyone needing this can go to GospelCom.net and get it in any number of different versions. Peter Ellis 14:59, 2 May 2005 (UTC)


 * This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.