Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/K. C. John


 * 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 no consensus.   A rbitrarily 0   ( talk ) 21:54, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

K. C. John

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Doing the technicalities on behalf of user:Rak-Tai who doesn't consider this gentleman notable  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  13:30, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:16, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:16, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:17, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment An odd one to look through this because there is another K.C. John born in 1924 who would probably meet the notability guidelines. However, this article was created about a K.C. John born in 1947, although this information has been removed from the article at some point. Polargeo (talk) 14:20, 26 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete I had technical problems with the process AfD, and assistance was kindly granted. This individual, whoever he is, does not appear notable. Pastors are typically not deemed notable on Wikipedia just because they have a religious position. This article has no citations of notability. There are no references on Google that endorse notability. รัก-ไทย 16:15, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep -- The President of a Christian denonimation with 7500 churches is certainly notable. The article lacks references, but so do many others.  That is a reason to imporve it, not delete it.  If the other K C John is also notable, an article on him could be created as K. C. John (Journalist).  If he is more notable, this aricle could be moved to K. C. John (Pastor).  I am not surprised that it is difficult to find relevant Ghits, since there is not very distinctive word in the title.  Peterkingiron (talk) 18:26, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - There are not a lot of indexed news articles about this person, but there many sources on the Internet. As the equivalent of a bishop, I would consider him notable. Bearian (talk) 22:26, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I have searched Google to find articles about John to verify notability, but there are only self-promoted and related articles--nothing from a non-biased press. Please read this: Notability should be demonstrated using reliable sources according to Wikipedia guidelines (not policy)[1]. Reliable sources generally include mainstream news media and major academic journals, and exclude self-published sources, particularly when self-published on the internet. The foundation of this theory is that such sources "exercise some form of editorial control."[4]. Further, he is NOT a bishop, but rather a somewhat self-appointed titular head of a losely-controlled affiliation of churches รัก-ไทย 03:48, 29 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep regardless of the possibly promotional nature of the sources, the head of a large national-level federation of churches is notable.    DGG ( talk ) 02:13, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
 * The "large national-level federation of churches" is merely a vague number-listing of Pentecostal churches in India. The group does not appear to have any evidence of their grossly inflated and non-verifiable claims. The article is probably self-written by the so-called "heads"--not by a factual, non-biased source. A better approach would be to add material from this (auto?)biography to the Indian Pentecostal Church of God article. Wikipedia articles require that they be verifiable, which this article does not. รัก-ไทย 05:10, 1 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete. If the person is notable, then we require evidence of such in the form of non-trivial coverage from reliable third party publications.  Where is it?   JBsupreme  ( talk ) 22:47, 1 February 2010 (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.