Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Jehovah's Witnesses conventions


 * 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   delete. Cirt (talk) 04:25, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

List of Jehovah&

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This article consists of three sentences about the conventions, and a list showing the title of each year's convention. The titles are rather generic and don't really provide any insight (as far as I can tell) into how one year's convention differed from the next. The info is unsourced. On August 8, I added notability, wikify and orphan tags; on September 3 (when there had been no improvement) I prodded; on September 8 the prod was removed and a proposal was made to merge the content into Jehovah's Witnesses or History of Jehovah's Witnesses. The merge discussion is here, but it hasn't been conclusive (although I don't think anyone has spoken in favor of merging). Propaniac (talk) 15:36, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete - unless the list makes note of conventions that according to JW folklore are imagined to correlate to verses from the book of Revelation (See Revelation - It's Grand Climax at Hand), or any that were accompanied by significant events in opposition, such as bomb threats etc (if any such events exist). If kept, the article should be linked to, but not merged into Beliefs and Practices of Jehovah's Witnesses and/or History of Jehovah's Witnesses. In any case, conventions that have no special significance should probably be removed.--Jeffro77 (talk) 16:49, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * DeleteAs it is, the article has very little, if any, utility. No context is provided to demonstrate notability. Were there to be so much as sourced paragraphs detailing each convention, the article might be of use. However, Propaniac has demonstrated that there is no effort to improve the article to a useful state. Carl.bunderson (talk) 18:33, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. No information, no value. LTSally (talk) 21:47, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  21:55, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete -- these convenions consist of a text prepared centrally being read to those attending. Accordingly, this article is the equivalent of a list of book titles.  The article might be very useful if it exposed how the Jehovah's Witnesses change their beliefs every decade or so, so that the articles provided a paragraph summarising what was taught at each convention, something that would probably surprise many current Witnesses.  Peterkingiron (talk) 22:50, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually only a small number of talks at their conventions are 'script talks' that are prepared centrally to be read verbatim. It is therefore not strictly analogous to a list of books. It is a valid point though, that it might be worth retaining mention of conventions at which significant changes in doctrine have been made, though this could probably be achieved in the History article.--Jeffro77 (talk) 00:11, 25 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep history, merge, and lock redirect but will accept what looks like a consensus to delete. I am the one who deprodded it in favor of a merge.  I have already copied the links to the video and audio to History of Jehovah's Witnesses, so there won't be any great harm done if this is deleted.  If someone wants to restore this information in a well-sourced manner in the appropriate section of the appropriate article, they can probably find what they need in official publications.  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  01:21, 26 September 2008 (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.