Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Unitarian Universalist Independent Affiliate organizations


 * 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. I am boldly going to then move this to Unitarian Universalist Independent Affiliate organizations and remove the list of redlinks: even the orgs that HAVE articles probably shouldn't.  Mango juice talk 15:02, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

List of Unitarian Universalist Independent Affiliate organizations
not sure if this is listcruft, use of wikipedia as a directory/repository of links. Definetively wikipedia is not a directory/webhosting service. To me, this page does not look encyclopedic (see WP:NOT Yy-bo 15:35, 3 September 2006 (UTC) See Districts of the Unitarian Universalist Association, also under afd. Refer author(s) to webhosting. User:Yy-bo 17:43, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, maybe speedy as db-empty. Just a list of links, mostly red. Fan-1967 15:44, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete as per CSD A3. This is better served by a category, really.  --Dennis The TIger 16:14, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: tagged with db-empty. --Dennis The TIger 16:15, 3 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep, list of organizations of a major religion, many of which have their own articles, seems encyclopedic (and useful) to me. –Shoaler (talk) 17:19, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep as per Shoaler. - UtherSRG (talk) 18:05, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep and explain The article doesn't give enough explanation to know what an affiliate is, which should be the first thing added. Lists of redlinks are ok, lists of external links would not be.  This is redlinks.  GRBerry 01:49, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - a better job is done by a category. BlueValour 02:28, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Comment: In response to some of these concerns, I have added a description of a UU Independent Affiliate to the article along with examples of more closely affiliated organizations. Some of these organizations, even though technically "independent", are the heart and soul of the denomination, are therefore quite notable even though they do not have articles yet. For this reason, I do not believe a category, which does not support red-letter links, is the best way to develop this portion of the encyclopedia. I would also encourage persons who are interested in Unitarian Universalism to start creating articles for some of these organizations. –Shoaler (talk) 13:37, 14 September 2006 (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.