Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jehovah's Witnesses beliefs


 * 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   speedy keep. no argument for deletion, disruptive nomination (non-admin closure) –Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 19:02, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Jehovah&
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

Reason Spudpicker 01 (talk) 03:39, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. No reason provided by the nominator, for whom this nomination is their first contribution to Wikipedia. The article has undergone extensive discussion to reach its current, stable state. It is comprehensively sourced, accurate, fair and balanced. It has recently come under attack as "lies" by an anon JW editor, who has, on request, provided one objection to the article which multiple editors have shown was baseless. This nomination is possibly that person's response. BlackCab (talk) 04:13, 12 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep. The IP user who originally requested this deletion went through several different IP addresses to make his beliefs known. At the talk page for this article, I asked him to please point out any assertions of the article that he believed were lies. Finally, after getting nothing but "this is all lies" responses, he mentioned the first sentence. After both I and another user pointed out documented, sourced evidence (from the user's own religious publications) that proved he was wrong, instead of discussing it, he simply quoted scripture (specifically Matthew 25:41-46, a childish form of a threat is my assumption) and said once again that it was a lie. This article is heavily sourced, mostly with JW official publications (which might be its only fault, as there should be more secondary sources), fairly written, and accurate. Then, after being told that an anonymous IP user could not realistically request a page deletion, a newly registered user completed the nomination who has exactly 0 edits. Vyselink (talk) 05:15, 12 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep. The nominator, who registered an account solely for the purpose of nominating this article for deletion, has previously been arguing (as a dynamic IP editor) at the article's Talk page that it is 'full of lies', yet only raised one single specific objection, which was shown to be flawed from the religious organisation's own literature. There have been persistent requests for the editor to indicate his other specific concerns with the article, but the editors only real objection to the article is that he just doesn't like it. See Talk:Jehovah's Witnesses beliefs.-- Jeffro 77 (talk) 08:58, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
 * The nominator, a new account with no other edits, claimed at the article's Talk page that "I had to agree with the anonymous user above ... so I went ahead and completed the deletion request for the page for the anonymous user." This seems to be a fairly obvious instance of sockpuppetry.-- Jeffro 77 (talk) 09:01, 12 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2011 December 12.  Snotbot   t &bull; c &raquo;  17:15, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 18:33, 12 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Speedy Keep. Per WP:CSK #1, when nominator "fails to advance an argument for deletion". Nor is there an obvious case for deletion. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 18:53, 12 December 2011 (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.