Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Keith Drury (theologian)


 * 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. Doczilla @SUPERHEROLOGIST 08:35, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Keith Drury (theologian)

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

Fails WP:SIGCOV. Been on the cat:nn list for 10+ years and never been updated. Fails WP:NPROF. Refs are passing mentions.  scope_creep Talk  08:31, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Christianity. Shellwood (talk) 08:43, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. Drury's 1994 Article "The Holiness Movement is Dead" in Holiness Digest 8, no. 1, Winter 1994, and his 1995 speech to the Christian Holiness Partnership were apparently the topic of a book: Keith Drury; Richard S. Taylor; Kenneth J. Collins; Wallace Thornton, Jr.; Larry D. Smith. Counterpoint: Dialogue with Drury on The Holiness Movement (2005).  Schmul Publishing Company, Salem, OH.  ISBN 0-88019-495-2. He's also anthologized in this anthology of Holiness figures, where the reviewer describes him as "well known"--Jahaza (talk) 10:09, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Being described as well known, isn't any kind of reference as its a passing mention. I'll take a look at the other.   scope_creep Talk  10:57, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
 * The book was written in collaboration with Drury. Its possible he might pass WP:NAUTHOR but I don't see any reviews of the books that would make that so. They're is very little other coverage.   scope_creep Talk  11:12, 2 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep. His book Holiness for ordinary people is theologically significant in the Welseyan Holiness Movement (12 editions, cf. ), numerous quotations, cf. ) ---Telikalive (talk) 12:12, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
 * The standard for these in WP:NAUTHOR. Is there any reviews of these books that will show he passes that notability policy? Blindly stating keep without evidence doesn't prove he is notable and won't lead to keep. Where is the evidence?   scope_creep Talk  14:29, 2 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Reverting comments in discussions is extremely poor form. Please don't do it again - but you've been here long enough that you should know that by now.  The URL is not malformed - though you will need to be logged in to the Wikipedia Library to see it.  Here it is again: .  The review is Snyder (2014), Wesleyan and Methodist Studies, vol 6, pp 206-208, Penn State University Press, 2014.  And yes, I've been here long enough I should know to sign my comments.  GoldenRing (talk) 16:26, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Alternative JSTOR link for the same article:  GoldenRing (talk) 16:29, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
 * keep - former head of a significant religious denomination, author of books that I suspect are notable, well-cited scholar, award recipient in his field. This article just needs some editing love, not deletion. Thparkth (talk) 16:40, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
 * To be clear, I don't think he was the head of the Wesleyan Church, just an official. Jahaza (talk) 17:38, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep In addition to the above, a Google Scholar search seems to substantiate and go beyond what's listed in this AfD. Obviously needs to be expanded, not deleted. Jclemens (talk) 04:41, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
 * keep -- The heads of major denominations, particularly long-standing ones, like bishops, are notable without more. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:10, 4 September 2022 (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.