Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Old Catholic Churches


 * 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. But all these external links need to go, as we are indeed not a web directory.  Sandstein  17:22, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

List of Old Catholic Churches

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

Wikipedia is not a directory. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 05:06, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. This is not a list of individual congregations, but rather of national denominations that make up the Old Catholic community. An annotated list such as this one, separated into useful groupings, is easier to understand than a category, especially when some of the denominations do not have their own articles. -- Eastmain (talk) 06:03, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 06:07, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 06:07, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak keep This list may not be of high quality, but it is something that somebody might want to look up. That said, I'd like for there to not be external links, but rather links to actual articles. On a related note, I'm not sure what is meant by "Wikipedia is not a dictionary" - this doesn't appear to me as a dictionary definition of any sort. But I do think the list could be improved, especially the header, which doesn't sufficiently explain the subject. Master&amp;Expert  ( Talk ) 07:04, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment: the word used was "directory", not "dictionary". - Fayenatic (talk) 18:11, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Whoops, didn't notice that before. :) Master&amp;Expert  ( Talk ) 00:45, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment: This may be useful, but the directory comment is not void. This article is ripe with external links rather than internal ones and the part I read is not exactly helpful in determining what I'm looking at. If this is kept. It should undergo some serious work or face deletion again. - Mgm|(talk) 09:21, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - I'm concerned about it lacking sources, which is not necessarily a reason to delete, but it almost looks like an A3 in its current form. Still, it looks like good info to have, and I agree a category wouldn't cover it as well. Perhaps this article needs WP:RESCUE? Frank  |  talk  10:57, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - the subject seems interesting and notable, even if the article itself currently needs substantial cleanup. Fumoses (talk) 16:31, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - WP:NOTDIRECTORY applies. Springnuts (talk) 17:41, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep; I have rewritten the lead paragraph with a brief intro to provide context. However, the list needs trimming.  At present it is a mixture of both provinces/dioceses (etc) and individual local parishes.  I suspect that generally the local churches are not suffiently notable to be listed (with external links); only those that have their own articles which meet WP:N should be kept. Trim it to a list of national bodies, dioceses, and any notable local congregations/church buildings. That would be more encyclopedic and less a directory. - Fayenatic (talk) 18:11, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - provided there is substantial cleanup. RockManQ  (talk) 22:44, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep: This list is useful for anyone interested in the Old Catholic tradition.  Possibly needs changing to a category rather than an article. Afterwriting (talk) 07:07, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong keep. Important list about a notable, verifiable historical subject. --Gene_poole (talk) 09:11, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment -- the main object in hqaving lists of this kind is to idnetify articles on notable subject that are missing. However this is actually a list of churches with external links.  If it was a list of WP articles, converting to a category would be useful.  At present the category would be nearly empty.  The consensus is that most churches are not notable (though I often advocate merging them with the village or twon where they are, rather than deleting them).  I see nothing to indicate that any of the external links concerns a notable church, but only notable churches require articles.  Are the links derived from a denominational website? If so the answer is to make sure that the main webpage appears as a prominent external link in an article on the denomination.  Peterkingiron (talk) 23:04, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. WP is not a directory for one thing, for the other, all items on the list notable enough to merit a separate article can be found through a category. Therefore, redundant. A cleanup does not help here. --Tone 11:37, 1 November 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.