Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Sunter


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Liz Read! Talk! 00:10, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

James Sunter

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Don't see how this individual is notable enough for a page, both in the general sense and in the parameters for which clerics are notable. Much of the article is unreferenced, and some of the sources at the bottom are only brief mentions. One actually focuses on the son of the subject. Leonstojka (talk) 23:48, 5 June 2024 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Ganesha811 (talk) 01:15, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Christianity, England,  and Australia.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  00:05, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, Christianity, England,  and Australia. &#8213;  "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk)  00:09, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep Canon Sunter was arguably the most important incumbent of St Paul's church (now repurposed), the third, and most central, Anglican church in Adelaide. His activities were regularly reported in Adelaide newspapers, rating over 1,000 mentions on Trove, and there may be more to find, as the illustration appears to be taken from an encyclopedia or church history. Doug butler (talk) 21:04, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Keep - With all due respect to the hard-workings of Wikipedians who insist on adherence to all the Wikipedia dictates ... there's more to it when it comes to spiritual leaders. I've done a great many Hawaii articles on spiritual leaders. The ones that impress me with their Christian walk in life, are not the ones who necessarily made the headlines when alive.  It's people like Alice Kahokuoluna and Father Damien who put their own safety aside to care for the helpless leprosy patients. The ones who don't impress me are the spiritual leaders who make the news, and hobnob with legislative leaders. Not to knock Wikipedia guidelines, but people putting their own lives and welfare on the line to serve others, just doesn't seem to arise in Wikipedia guidelines. — Maile  (talk) 02:49, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete: I tend to agree with the nomination. This is a rather well-sourced biography of a religious person, but I'm not sure what the notability is... He built a school, ministered to the faithful, other routine things. I suppose it would all get reported on at the time, but it's all strictly local news reporting on what the pastor was up to that week. Oaktree b (talk) 03:53, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, a lot of Wikipedia is like that. That's what makes it useful. Doug butler (talk) 04:28, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
 * What's wrong with this source, which appears to be an extensive full-column long story on his life in a major newspaper? BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:14, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Linked five times in the article. Doug butler (talk) 15:52, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Relisting comment: This isn't a debate about inclusionists vs. deletionists but just whether or not the sources that can be located can establish notability. Let's focus on that here before closing this discussion. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 00:56, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Technical question: when the deletionists have whittled the English WP down to 1 million articles class C and above, or 2 million mid-importance or higher, how much storage space will be saved ? Doug butler (talk) 16:12, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Weak keep. Of the included sources, I find a bare minimum of two instances of WP:SIGCOV: the Advertiser obit and a Quiz and Lantern column. I didn't find any other SIGCOV in a cursory BEFORE search but the baseline for WP:GNG is "multiple" so I suppose this qualifies. Dclemens1971 (talk) 23:08, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep as there is multiple reliable newspaper sources coverage such as the two mentioned above, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 18:01, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep: above discussion shows subject passes WP:GNG. StAnselm (talk) 18:10, 24 June 2024 (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.