Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of churches in Fort Wayne, Indiana


 * 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.  Majorly   (hot!)  19:55, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

List of churches in Fort Wayne, Indiana

 * - (View AfD) (View log)

List of churches in Fort Wayne, Indiana

List of churches in Fort Wayne, Indiana (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

WP:NOT 63.101.179.35 08:59, 8 April 2007 (UTC) Wikipedia is not a directory. If a list of Megachurches around the nation and world whose impact is great is not encyclopedic, then certainly this is not.


 * Strong Keep -- First of all, no reasons are given at the page for the proposed deletion. Second, this page is a spin off the Fort Wayne, Indiana page, in accordance with Summary style. The information is of very practical use to people visiting Fort Wayne and looking for a place to go to church. It is also an illustration of Fort Wayne's vibrant religious culture, which goes back to the very beginnings of its existence. Finally, it is no different than many other lists in Wikipedia. -- CTS  Wyneken (talk) 10:29, 8 April 2007 (UTC)


 * keep -- It doesn't hurt.74.138.202.34 21:54, 8 April 2007 (UTC)


 * weak keep -- I see this as an extension of the Ft. Wayne Article is is a list but not a directory per se'. I am not sure about a non-registered user or anon nominating an article for deletion either.M-BMor 04:32, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 09:36, 10 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete - Wikipedia is not a directory. "It doesn't hurt" is not a valid argument for inclusion. Otto4711 13:05, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete Per Otto4711, it's a useless list and is clearly in violation of WP:NOT Thewinchester (talk) 14:02, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as useless list--Greatestrowerever 16:07, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm curious as to why, in the light of my arguments above, you think the list useless. It illustrates the nickname for the city, "city of churches" and represents its heritage going back to its founding. It provides a way for people to see which traditions are represented in the city and so provides a reference function. Finally, it is no more or less useful than the thousands of other lists on the net. Are you suggesting they should all go? I believe that it fits well within the criteria of wp:lists and fits the procedure of Summary style.--CTS Wyneken (talk) 19:35, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Honestly on this one I can see both sides. As a list ... a stand alone article it may not be. However as a tag or sub article maybe under the heading "City of Churches" with explanation as to why the list itself is important it could be useful even enclyclopedic. When the list of Mega-churches was deleted and posted as a re-direct to the article it made sense. Each church could be a stand alone article if it is of note. Each church in Fort Wayne may not be on it's own but as part of a unique, distinctive, and (here's the important part) notable local culture .. then yeah a list illustrating the point is good if it has some summary as to its uniqueness. If the claim "most per captia" is sourced and validated I say go for it expand and maybe rename the article. As a stand alone list I am still a very weak keep. If only as precident the megachurches on the mega church list hit at a much broader cultural phenomenon.M-BMor 02:05, 11 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep and tag with clean up to remove the commercial directory type elements. - Davodd 21:14, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak keep, and revise into an article such as Religion in Fort Wayne, Indiana; I seem to recall that Fort Wayne has one of the highest (perhaps the highest) ratio of churches to residents in the U.S. (hence the nickname), so it's certainly a significant factor in local culture. Such an article should cover religiously affiliated colleges such as the University of Saint Francis (Indiana), Taylor University and Concordia Theological Seminary, as well as the Roman Catholic Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend. Just as a list, however, it's not really useful here; but the list can be part of a good article. MisfitToys 01:47, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, churches are not more part of the local culture than fast food joints and grocery stores and probably less well attended than the my examples. Since we wouldn't condone Fast food restaurants in Fort Wayne, Indiana or Grocery stores in Fort Wayne, Indiana, we shouldn't have the churches article either. Carlossuarez46 23:03, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * In that you are wrong. Churches are very much a part of the culture of this city. It influences much of what happens here, with a cathedral, a seminary and three Christian colleges. Attendance rates are at least 40% of the city (if I remember correctly) attending once a month or more. So, it is your right to recommend deletion, but please find another reason to do so. --CTS Wyneken (talk) 23:15, 11 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete WP:NOT Johnbod 15:14, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep This will prove a useful alternative to having articles about all the churches, most of which will be of borderline notability at best.DGG 18:45, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Agreed it may prevent un-notable articles ... but honestly that is not a sole reason to keep. If the articles about the individual churches are not rated or adopted by a wikiproject, or nominated for deletion as non-notable -- the articles will not be here to make that much a difference. On the other hand if each church on the list meets the notability criterion then hey they should have their own article. I think an expanded article that shows the UNIQUINESS and NOTABILITY of religious culture in Fort Wayne noted by the volume of faith communities per capita is the way to go. A list just doesn't seem to have much merit on it's own. I reffer back to the precident on the List of Megachurches Talk:List of megachurches.M-BMor 01:26, 16 April 2007 (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.