Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joseph Mor Gregorios


 * 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) &mdash; Music1201  talk  23:18, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Joseph Mor Gregorios

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I'm not sure if this is a notable individual. The only sources about him are either passing mentions such as this in relation to the position or rumors related to a succession concern. I'm not sure if a bishop in most churches would be enough for notability but this one I'm not sure about. Ricky81682 (talk) 07:16, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Uanfala (talk) 18:23, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Uanfala (talk) 18:23, 16 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep per WP:CLERGYOUTCOMES. Bishops of major denominations (including Eastern Orthodox) are considered notable. StAnselm (talk) 19:55, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep as a bishop of a significant denomination he ought to be notable. I think we are rather short on the usual bio-articles on those of non-English-speaking senominations, which is more the reason to keep.  Peterkingiron (talk) 18:07, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. Run of the mill priest, with no apparent claim to notability. If it was a businessman it would be the same. Bishophood alone does not make someone worthy for Wikipedia inclusion any more than being a Managing Director does. Engleham (talk) 18:53, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note that, actually, it Bishophood often does, as per WP:CLERGYOUTCOMES.E.M.Gregory (talk) 19:23, 18 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep while StAnselm and Peterkrigiron are spot on, I was a little uncomfortable with keeping a completely unsourced article because we do still need to VERIFY, and, frankly, because I not only did not recognize the name, I didn't even recognize the name of the place that he is Bishop of. It's in Kerala.   This Times of India article resolves my hesitation,  Joseph Mor Gregorios may soon succeed Baselios Thomas as head of Jacobite Church?.  Sources exist, article needs improvement.E.M.Gregory (talk) 19:27, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
 * (cheeky:))comment. From Citing this page in AfD section of Articles for deletion/Common outcomes which contains WP:CLERGYOUTCOMES - "Avoid over-reliance on citing these "common outcomes" when stating one's case at Articles for Deletion. While precedents can be useful in helping to resolve notability challenges, editors are not necessarily bound to follow past practice. When push comes to shove, notability is demonstrated by the mustering of evidence that an article topic is the subject of multiple instances of non-trivial coverage in trustworthy independent sources.", so we are almost there. Coolabahapple (talk) 19:04, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Except that while that applies to many outcomes, it is has not in fact been applied in that manner to certain, specific categories including princes regnant ( many articles about medieval rules of states that were significant entities back in the day  have only the name and dates of a ruler, and even the dates may only be approximate.)  This also applies to holders of Sees in major Churches, who were not infrequently princes regents of significant states  (see, for example List of Greek Orthodox Patriarchs of Alexandria and lists of Anglican bishops, in these  and in many similar articles you will find links to clerics like Catherine S. Roskam and Patriarch Gregory III of Alexandria.  We keep them just as we keep really unimportant provincial legislators and Prime Ministers of countries the size of a postage stamp (Kristján Jónsson), because they are in a category that we have deemed definitionally notable.  So, yes, I agree that this article should be sourced and expanded.  But in this case, keeping should not depend on sourcing, only on the fact that he is a Bishop in a major denomination/Church. (We do delete bishops of non-notable Churches, usually small, recently created Protestant denominations.)E.M.Gregory (talk) 21:18, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
 * , thanks for the explanation, in this case a keep is in order. Coolabahapple (talk) 03:15, 20 July 2016 (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.