Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/J.J. Rouse


 * 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   no consensus. Secret account 15:06, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

J.J. Rouse

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Unreferenced article about a non notable evangelist. I find no evidence to support this article remaining. Paste Talk 21:33, 1 December 2008 (UTC) Paste Talk 21:33, 1 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I did not make the original nomination, however I am also nominating the following related pages because Alexander Marshall is another evangelist of similar vein, again copied over from Brethrenpedia and without significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject.:


 * With apologies if this treads on toes, however I think one AfD wil do for both. Springnuts (talk) 00:40, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

COMMENT – This is not treading on toes – this against procedure. First, you submit an additional article 4 days after the original nomination was posted. Remember, a AFD is usually only posted for 5 days. Hence, you are only giving the community 1 day to respond. NO! Second, it is about a separate individual. As it is about a separate individual – a separate article and the only tie in is that it mentions J.J. Rouse, how do you come to the conclusion that they should be reviewed in the same AFD? Also, have you considered the earlier opinion expressed, before you submitted this piece? Do you judge their responses for both articles? Or just the first? ShoesssS Talk 15:41, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. I made that point rather more gently below, and Springnuts has agreed that the additional nomination should be withdrawn, so there's no need to fly off the handle. Phil Bridger (talk) 18:06, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - Typical Monday response, on my end, not yours. I am sorry. ShoesssS Talk 18:24, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

What makes an evangelist "notable"? This particular evangelist helped to establish Gospel Hall assemblies in Canada. I'm not trying to be contrary... but what criteria are you looking for? Does he need to have established churches in a larger denomination? Sayworth


 * Delete - I read this a couple times and do not see how the subject comes close to meeting the basic criteria of notability. --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 21:47, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep – I found some information that Mr. Rouse was responsible with the “…earliest assembly in Alberta” as shown here,, which would establish Notability. Does the article need a complete rewrite yes.  However, I would hate to throw out the baby with the dirty bathwater.  ShoesssS Talk 21:54, 1 December 2008 (UTC).
 * Reply- Are you sure that's the same person? The wiki article says he was from Ontario, while your links says Edmonton.  I'm no expert on Canadian Geography, but I believe those two places are pretty far apart. I'm also not seeing anything else to connect the two articles --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 22:17, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Reply - Finding any thing to connect to the way the article is written now would be monumental.  Regarding J.J. Rouse, the article only says that he was born in Ontario in 1885, nothing about where he preached.  In my cite, location Edmonton, is for 1905 just about the right time that Mr. Rouse would be starting his ministry.  Given the fact of their unusual reference to name J.J., I am pretty sure they are the same. ShoesssS Talk 22:34, 1 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment. Here's another source, and this suggests that the subject may have been notable as a writer. Phil Bridger (talk) 13:56, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions.   -- Raven1977 (talk) 23:07, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions.   -- Raven1977 (talk) 23:07, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep for now -- This article is probably as yet only half written, so that it is difficult to judge its value. There is too much detail in this article for it to be invented.  It should be tagged as incomplete and as lacking sources.  The article is (if anything too detailed for the brief biographic articles usual in WP, but that is no reason to delete it.   Full names should be gien if possible, also date of death.  Peterkingiron (talk) 00:19, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete for lack of significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. This article is a straight lift from Brethrenpedia  which has different standards for inclusion.  If he is notable the article can be re-created with proper sources. Springnuts (talk) 00:30, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * It might be a "lift" from Brethrenpedia... but I am the one who wrote it over there. The source of the material is a book on the life of J.J. Rouse that I don't have in my posession at the moment.  I had planned on completing the article while I had the book... but have not got it completed yet.  It's true, the way it's written might be more suitable for Brethrenpedia, but I also hoped that others might eventually help with cleaning it up, and adding what they know about this man.  I'm not 100% sure, but I think the book about Rouse was published by Pickering and Inglis...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sayworth (talk • contribs) 19:25, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm pretty sure that the book mentioned in this article, J. J. Rouse’s Pioneer Work in Canada, is the one I used to start writing the entry on J.J. Rouse. It was about a year ago that I wrote it over at Brethrenpedia... haven't had time to go back to it yet.
 * Response - One book - that you do not have - is not "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". It's nothing personal - just the standard of notability Wikipedia asks for.  Springnuts (talk) 19:04, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Sayworth (talk) 19:39, 5 December 2008 (UTC) 
 * Partial Significance of A.Marshall and J.J.Rouse There is a controversy on the origins of the Gospel Hall Brethren.  Some in the movement claim that these people who resemble the Plymouth Brethren in so many ways, actually had nothing to do with them.  I do not believe this is true.  I think it's possible that the original Scotish Brethren might have started up separately, without any contact with any Plymouth Brethren influences.  However, when one goes into who some of these early Scotish Brethren associated with, one quickly sees that there was a connection.  Alexander Marshall was definitly in the circles of the Scotish Brethren of the Gospel Hall Brethren, yet in his biography, he was clearly also in the circles of other Plymouth Brethren.  The article on Alexander Marshall is only a stub at this point.  Again, hopefully someone will be able to complete it.  He started many of the brethren assemblies in Ontario and elsewhere in North America.  Rouse was connected with him.  Rouse was also a Pioneer, in that he began the work that started some of the assemblies.  Yes, he was from Ontario... but these men, once out as evangelists, typically travelled far and wide.  The reference to Rouse forming the earliest assembly in Alberta, is about the same J.J. Rouse.   Some of the events at the beginning of Rouse's time with the Brethren, is not at all similar to how the Gospel Hall Brethren operate in current times.  For those who might be studying this sect, this provides an interesting perspective.  I apologize that I have not completed the article, or given the source.  I will eventually give the source, once I get my hands on the old book again.
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Black Kite 17:57, 7 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep - I think he's done enough that he ought to be included. The links from Shoessss sway me. (And keep the other two articles as well). - Richard Cavell (talk) 22:18, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Procedural keep of the additional articles nominated by Springnuts. They weren't included here until four days after this AfD was started so can't reasonably be considered as part of the same discussion. They should be nominated separately if thought to require deletion. Phil Bridger (talk) 22:32, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 * No objection to procedural keep of the Alexander Marshall article(s)(it is one article only, albeit duplicated) - I had hoped they might be discussed together but that has not happened. Springnuts (talk) 23:01, 7 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 05:11, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 05:12, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

I have to admit, it's a poorly written article. I would prefer it to be more scholarly and relevant. For lack of time, I'm unable to complete or fix it at the moment. I personally hope someone who is more of a historian is able to complete it, and make it more relevant and notable -- hopefully someone without the bias I have referred to here and elsewhere. If, the article is NOT deleted do these comments here become part of the discussion page of the actual article? I don't know how this works, but I think it could be beneficial to keep the comments intact, and accessible from the original article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sayworth (talk • contribs) 15:30, 8 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment. This discussion will be preserved with a link from the article talk page if it is kept. Phil Bridger (talk) 18:06, 8 December 2008 (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.