Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jack Mormon


 * 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) Tim Song (talk) 02:54, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Jack Mormon

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

The article seems entirely descriptive of a non-notable slang term, and despite how many statements it contains overrall, I have found little that actually supports the content of the article which largely consists of irrelevant facts, stories, useless trivia and opinion attributed without fact. Plus, despite being "categorised" as a religious subculture, the article holds little foundation or structure on even actually defining the exsistence, notability and even purpose of the subject. It is very much a useless, unencylopedic mess with little resource to turn it around. As I doubt after looking on google, the name of a coffee company, a few random mentions of it and an urban dictionary definition is enough to supportit. Routerone (talk) 18:26, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Um, no. Strong Keep.  This term is well established in literature and in all culture in frequent contact with Mormons.  EVERY Mormon knows what a Jack Mormon is.  If we want to start culling Mormon articles, I can pick a few better ones, but this wouldn't be one of them.  The LDS church even acknowledges and defines the term on its website here, offering as a source a reprint of a 1974 article in one of its own publications.  Since you are Mormon as you clearly indicate on your user page, this smacks of being disruptive to make a point, as I think you know better.  (BTW, I am not Mormon) Reswobslc (talk) 19:09, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep: This article addresses a historic description of a religious sub-category, based on 19th century media and public perception.  As such it is analogous to abolitionist or populist, similar sub-categories used in the US at the time.  Given the fact that the term's meaning has evolved over time and developed slightly different meanings in the 20th and now the 21st Century, it is important that the article address the progressive change in social perception.  This term is found in modern histories, based on contemporary newspaper accounts, diaries and journals. User:Routerone's concerns seem to be based on web searches, a very unreliable source for 19th century history.  The web does not contain all the history of the world as modern techs generally have little interest in anything that far back.  So...... articles like this are why we are trying to write Wikipedia!  And, for the record, I am a Mormon.  WBardwin (talk) 03:49, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep per Reswoblc. Numerous Google Books hits indicate that this term is still in use. My main concern would be that this article could tend to be perceived as a dictionary article, and Wikipedia is not a dictionary. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 05:05, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep. Although "Jack Mormon" is more than just a "slang term" as the nom describes it, this article is really about the term "Jack Mormon" rather than, well, being about Jack Mormons.  (And for the record, I'm not a Mormon.) -Glenfarclas (talk) 09:21, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep. Appears notable. The article itself has multiple issues. --JohnnyB256 (talk) 21:41, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep poor article quality is not grounds for deletion. Article could be, potentially, merged elsewhere, but I'd like to give it a chance to improve, like maybe three to six months, before proposing it for merger. John Carter (talk) 00:07, 28 November 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.