Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Lipscomb


 * 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__. Sources presented in discussion establish the subject's notability. signed,Rosguill talk 01:30, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

John Lipscomb

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

NN bio - WP:1E, fails WP:GNG otherwise. UtherSRG (talk) 17:42, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Religion, United States of America,  and Florida. UtherSRG (talk) 17:42, 7 June 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete, per nom Andre🚐 17:46, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Christianity. Shellwood (talk) 17:49, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete Doesn't meet WP:GNG JunitaWorker (talk) 17:53, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete. We had a discussion on the Talk about potential notability, but there was no consensus there and a glance shows me no new sourcing since last summer with which to improve the article. Star   Mississippi  01:23, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep This individual has been covered by multiple independent reliable sources in the context of multiple events. An online search turned up the following sources:
 * 1) An article from 1997 in The Tampa Tribune;
 * 2) A piece about his 1997 ordination to the Anglican priesthood from The Tampa Bay Times (then the St. Petersburg Times);
 * 3) A 1997 AP wire story about his ordination to the episcopal priesthood;
 * 4) A 2003 piece from The Bradenton Herald about his opposition to elevation of Gene Robinson to the Episcopal episcopate;
 * 5) A 2003 piece from The Tampa Tribune about a letter Lipscomb penned following the vote to elevate Gene Robinson to the status of Bishop;
 * 6) A 2003 piece from The Naples Daily News about a letter he instructed be read to his congregations;
 * 7) A fairly long profile in the The Tampa Tribune that was published in February 2007;
 * 8) A May 2007 piece in the Sarasota Herald-Tribune announcing he was stepping down from the episcopate;
 * 9) Another profile in The Tampa Tribune that was published in November 2007 about his conversion to Catholicism;
 * 10) A November 2007 piece in The Ledger about his conversion to Catholicism.
 * 11) A profile piece that was published in The Tampa Bay Times about his ordination as a Catholic priest in 2009.
 * Notability is based on the existence of suitable sources, not on the state of sourcing in an article. As the individual appears to pass WP:NBASIC, and this clearly isn't a WP:BLP1E or WP:BIO1E situation, the only conclusion I can reach here is to keep the article. There's some work to be done to improve the article to include broader coverage of this person, but that doesn't mean that we should delete this. After all, as WP:DEL-CONTENT notes, [i]f editing can improve the page, this should be done rather than deleting the page. — Red-tailed hawk  (nest) 18:19, 8 June 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep: per RTH. This is someone with a minor degree of fame in a corner of the universe I am familiar with. ~ Pbritti (talk) 05:06, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep, since there is potential to improve the page and some WP:NBASIC is validated. Normally, WP:BISHOPS is enough for that reason, even though a more in-depth coverage is needed for WP:SIGCOV. Chiserc (talk) 10:16, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep per new sources given. The person who loves reading (talk) 16:44, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep as per the multiple reliable sources newspaper coverage identified in this discussion which combined shows a pass of WP:GNG so that deletion is unnecessary in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 18:38, 11 June 2023 (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.