Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John MacArthur bibliography


 * 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. J04n(talk page) 10:41, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

John MacArthur bibliography

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

List of works by author. Neither the author, nor the works themselves, have sufficient notability to justify a standalone article--only 1 seems to have an article now. See the requirements of Notability: No evidence the works have been "discussed as a group or set." It's just a list of works, the most important of which can be merged into John F. MacArthur. Not every author needs a list of works article. GrapedApe (talk) 22:58, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
 * OPPOSE, since this has already been discussed, and both the author and the works (as a list) are notable enough to justify a standalone article. Author bibliographies, as well as Category:Christian bibliographies. Ἀλήθεια 14:14, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
 * This is the first AFD for this article. A 2-person talkpage discussion from 2009 isn't a strong indication of consensus to keep.  Also, Other stuff exists is not a good reason to keep.--GrapedApe (talk) 01:30, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bibliographies-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:30, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:30, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:30, 5 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete agree with nom. Commentary for individual books of the Bible without a publisher is hardly notable for a stand alone article. The subject has clearly published books by a known Christian publishing house, but this is article is a poorly formatted CV. SalHamton (talk) 05:59, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment - what do you mean "without a publisher"? All of his major works have been published by well-established publishers - Moody, Victor, Thomas Nelson, Zondervan, Crossway, etc. Maher-shalal-hashbaz (talk) 14:33, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge back to bio article. Clearly an important theological author.  Both Moody Press and Word are major Christian publishers.  Any criticism that much of his output is commentaries is misplaced: these are a major aspect of theological writing.  Peterkingiron (talk) 12:57, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep - please don't merge this back into the main article. There is a reason it was split out, because MacArthur is such a prolific and influential author, with more than 100 published books alone. Also, this list includes two sources indicating the notability of his writing specifically. Although this list should be better sourced, including more reviews of his books (these sources abound, they simply haven't been added to the article), this isn't a good enough reason to delete.  It should instead be tagged for additional citations (specifically about his books). Maher-shalal-hashbaz (talk) 14:33, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep Nom is incorrect when he says that the author is not Notable enough to have a standalone article. He's one of the top five most influential preachers in Christian radio, in a league with Chuck Swindoll and Charles Stanley.  My Church library is loaded with his books, I've even read one or two of them.  Now, the Bibliography is much to extensive to shoehorn into the main article.  Yes it needs to be cleaned up, expanded, fleshed out, perhaps add a few reviews, but not deleted. In the interest of full disclosure, I have to admit that I am a fan of radio preachers generally but doesn't that very fact put me in a position to evaluate his Notability?  By analogy, if you want to know who is an important basketball player, you ask a basketball fan.Listmeister (talk) 19:56, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Please re-read nomination. The list of his works isn't notable enough for a standalone list article, I do not say that he is not notable enough for an article on himself.  --GrapedApe (talk) 23:35, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
 * "Neither the author, nor the works themselves, have sufficient notability to justify a standalone article," you said. I believe you are incorrect on both points.  He is Notable enough for an article, and a list of his works is also Notable enough for an article. Listmeister (talk) 15:49, 10 April 2013 (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.