Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Messianic and Hebrew Christian congregations (2nd nomination)


 * 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) 11:07, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

List of Messianic and Hebrew Christian congregations
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

The article is a list of non-notable congregations. Not even one of them is notable for its own Wikipedia article, and the creator of the article started the discussion page with "Taking steps to copy the list of Messianic congregations from various web searches and personal knowledge." This is a violation of WP:OR. The article is not encyclopedic; it is something more suited to a personal blog. Furthermore, the article was once deleted for these same grounds. This is the second time it has been created. - Lisa (talk - contribs) 21:28, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Delete Wikipedia should not be used as a soapbox. Listing non-notable religious congregations only serves to boost the profile of the congregations so listed. Wikipedia is not for: "Advocacy, propaganda, or recruitment of any kind: commercial, political, religious, or otherwise." Bus stop (talk) 22:35, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: Step 3 of the AfD process was not completed. It has been fixed. &mdash; KuyaBriBri Talk 22:36, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Canvassing? - Lisa: You may want to review the WP:Canvassing policy. You recently invited several editors (BusStop, JayJG, Avi, etc) to provide input on this AfD  ... a better approach is to put notifications on project pages, or just let editors find this AfD thru the normal AfD notification process. That will ensure a more representative cross-section of opinions. PS: I have no opinion on whether the article should be deleted or not. --Noleander (talk) 22:40, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Note: Five editors were canvassed concerning this AfD. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 22:44, 27 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment. Canvassing would seem to be a concern. The article as it is just a link farm. Are any of these congregations notable? I think at least some of them need to have articles for this to be kept. Note that Bus stop's rationale is not valid as the list is not inherently promotional. Christopher Connor (talk) 22:48, 27 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Why is it not "inherently promotional"? A Wikipedia listing provides prominence and a boost to the organization's profile. This is true even of comparable notable entities. The difference is these entities are given greater visibility without having first demonstrated notability for Wikipedia purposes. Bus stop (talk) 22:53, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
 * It may have that effect but that's not the point of the list. Christopher Connor (talk) 23:21, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
 * That's one view. I think certain MJ editors are using Wikipedia to create a public image of mainstream-ness.  This article was recreated after the number of such congregations was challenged on Messianic Judaism.  The editor who recreated this article had repeatedly tried to put a higher number in that article on the basis of WP:OR, and this article was intended as a support.  - Lisa (talk - contribs) 12:01, 28 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep but prune dramatically. Some few of the congregations are notable, particularly those which were among the first congregations in the movement and are discussed at some length in the relative literature. Many or most of the others are not, however, and they could and should be removed. John Carter (talk) 23:03, 27 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom and precedent. The criteria is too general - so far it is using congregations in the U.S., but then it will surely extend into the rest of the world. Congregations will open and close - this article makes it look more like a directory from a central organization of Messianic/Hebrew Christian congregations than an encyclopedia article. Any piece of useful info can be incorporated into the relevant master article, as can any note documenting the growth of this sect. Shiva   (Visnu)  23:14, 27 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. The article contains not a single congregation notable enough to have an article of its own and is not much more than a link farm.
 * Note - I don't think that the fact it was deleted under the same title before count as precedent, since it was speedied before the discussion could conclude.
 * Full disclosure - Although I was among those asked to comment here, I have edited the article in the past and would probably have found my way here, anyway. I don't think this should prejudice my ability to comment here. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 00:00, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Interesting point. I too would have commented here regardless of whether contacted or not. I commented here only days ago, and I was aware of these proceedings, and I would not have passed up the opportunity to express my displeasure with what I perceive as an unworthy use of Wikipedia. Bus stop (talk) 00:26, 28 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:33, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:33, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:33, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment. Just to clarify what canvassing is not.  As the guidelines states:  "An editor who may wish to draw a wider range of informed, but uninvolved, editors to a discussion might place a message at one of the following ... On the talk pages of individual users, such as those who have participated in previous discussions on the same topic (or closely related topics), who are known for expertise in the field, or who have asked to be kept informed. The audience must not be selected on the basis of their opinions – for example, if notices are sent to editors who previously supported deleting an article, then similar notices should be sent to those who supported keeping it."  I, too, have no opinion as to whether the article should be deleted or not, but note that the conclusory comment above to the effect that canvassing has indeed been engaged in was, IMHO, not reflective of a sensitivity to this aspect of the guideline.--Epeefleche (talk) 01:14, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete because it's a violation of WP:NOTDIRECTORY. Every last synagogue, church, mosque, ashram or religious shrine in America or on Earth does not "qualify" for an automatic listing on WP. Unless they can be written up as articles, even as stubs, and found to be fairly notable. That is something better left for Google or other search engines. Thus List of Messianic Jewish organizations exists and is enough, whereas the list in this AfD is a laborious violation of that by grand scale WP:Content forking. For the record, regardless of being contacted by the nominator, I always check WikiProject Deletion sorting/Judaism every time I log on to WP, so that I would have come here from there regardless of what is posted on my or anyone's talk page. Thanks, IZAK (talk) 04:04, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:LINKFARM. I shudder to think what List of Roman Catholic congregations would look like, especially if notability was not a criterion for inclusion. StAnselm (talk) 05:35, 28 September 2010 (UTC)


 * I think this may be an even better reason for deletion than the ones I listed at the start. - Lisa (talk - contribs) 12:01, 28 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:NOTDIRECTORY, WP:LINKFARM. Note: I was one of the editors contacted about this AfD, but I also noticed it on list of Judaism-related deletion discussions, and would have commented anyway, so the point is moot. Jayjg (talk) 15:30, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Clarification re: canvassing I had thought that posting the notice on the discussion page of the article was sufficient. When I didn't see any responses on this page, I was surprised, and posted requests on the pages of five other editors to get their attention. If this constituted canvassing, I apologize. But please note the time stamps on the creation of this AfD and the requests I made to those 5 editors, and you'll see what I'm talking about. - Lisa (talk - contribs) 17:09, 28 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete Messianic and Hebrew Christian Congrations would make a fine Category but a list is sheer non-sense The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 23:30, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment -- A major purpose of list articles is to identify (by redlinks) articles that are needed, but one rabbi has an article and none of the congregations. Most have a footnote, but this appears merely to be a link to their own website.  If kept, the list should be converted to a table, with the link as one column and the pastor/rabbi as another, but on the whole it might be better if it did not exist, as long as there is a directory elsewhere.  Peterkingiron (talk) 13:41, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per not link farm, not directory, OR, non notable.  He  iro  04:22, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Query: At what point does this AfD end and the consensus get implemented? - Lisa (talk - contribs) 01:12, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete I notice that none of the congregations on the list appears ot have a Wikipedia article. So I clicked several of the links, randomly, some led to dead pages, some to collective web sites, the few that led to pages for the individual congregation did not even have buildings of their own.   In a country with many churches and temples, these are pretty marginal.  So, while I understand that believers can allow their enthusiasm to carry them to create Wikipedia pages, I think this list should be deleted.AMuseo (talk) 01:22, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, I appreciate John Carter's comment, but casting about on google for some of these congregations, I did not find any of them to have sufficient coverage to justify notability. Absent articles on notable Messianic and Hebrew Christian Congrations, I see no reason to keep this list. --Nuujinn (talk) 13:18, 3 October 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.