Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of largest churches in the world


 * 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 keep.-Wafulz 19:02, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

List of largest churches in the world

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

There seems to be little point to this page. As the introduction itself says, there is no really objective way to determine the size of a church, and size is a pretty non-specific term in any case. Square feet or cubic feet (both very difficult to find information on for most churches in any case)? Which parts of the church should be included? For instance, the title of largest cathedral (and largest Gothic church) in the world is disputed between St John's Cathedral in New York and Liverpool Anglican Cathedral. In addition, the article has existed for a month and still only includes nine churches. This is only ever going to be a list of a) people's favourite churches and b) churches with easily discovered square/cubic area information (not many of them, I would suggest). -- Necrothesp 14:51, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. No real inclusion criteria, no attempt to define what constitutes a "church", and so on.  As stated, the very intro paragraph of this list admits that it is pretty much a mess.  Ark yan  &#149; (talk) 15:25, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * KeepThe square feet are used as the basis for "largest". The fact that one could quibble or could create other lists, such as "largest volume churches," does not prevent area being used to order the entries and to determine what goes on the list. It is not an indiscriminate list because someones favorite (small) church gets ppromptly deleted as not being as large as the large churches. The churches are notable because they were created, at staggering expense and effort, specifically to be notable.  St Peters was created with the goal of being large and impressive. Size is a very easy thing to measure; if it were instead List of prettiest churches in the world there would be more basis for quibbling. Footprint of a church is pretty easy to determine. The largest churches in the world have been written about and studied by architects. Quibbles or disclaimer do not justify deleting a list. The list is as encyclopedic as List of highest mountains which says "The dividing line between a mountain with multiple peaks and separate mountains is not always clear" and that the heights are uncertain.  List of lakes by area says "Note: The area of some lakes can vary considerably over time, either seasonally or from year to year". List of rivers by length  says "The length of a river is not always easy to calculate." Edison 15:28, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. Total area of what? The nave, the nave and aisles, the nave and aisles and chancel, every subsidiary building? What? Do you include the many chapels in large Roman Catholic churches? Does floor area necessarily mean largest? St Peter's has a large floor area indeed, but its impressive size is just as much to do with its height and its cavernous interior (i.e. volume). The criteria for the article are far too woolly. Yes, the largest churches have been written about extensively, but I can virtually guarantee that pretty much every account has a different figure for area. Compare with List of tallest churches in the world, which includes most of the top end of the tallest churches and has a clearly defined criterion for inclusion (tallest means tallest). Also note that of the nine churches so far included on the list two have no area specified and one has a variable area. -- Necrothesp 17:08, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment So do you want to delete the list of rivers, far woolier than the area of an 800 year old church, because of the many uncertainties and disagreements and year to year variation? Uncertainties and need for operational definitions are bases for editing, not for deletion. Big churches are big churches. The editing process, through consensus, can come up with a metric like Gross leasable area is for shopping malls. Maybe footprint of structures used for worship? Gross holy area? (e.t.a.:) I agree that source data needs to be cited, and that some stated criteria are needed. If the article does not improve in the next several months, the possible deletion could be revisited. It could also be limited to the few in the world with the largest square footage of usable interior space, the largest overall footprint, the greatest volume, and the largest seating capacity. A search shows that various chueches claim to be "largest" on criteria that favor them. Clearly more complicated than "tallest". But we have "largest office building" etc. Edison 21:36, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, agree totally with Edison.. Just because some of us may not like the idea of Lists as articles, does not mean it should be removed. Callelinea 15:32, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. For the record, I have no problem whatsoever with lists. Don't immediately assume a non-existent reason for proposing an AfD. -- Necrothesp 17:08, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep and explain what "TK" means. Criterion could be tightened up a bit, but is well enough defined. Clarityfiend 15:50, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * TK is just editorial shorthand for "to come."


 * Keep per Edison. Carlossuarez46 18:40, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Article acknowledges multiple criteria and sort feature allows ordering by desired characteristics. Ample sources are provided for this notable topic. Alansohn 20:41, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Size is not a non-specific term, and there are objective ways to determine it. Sure, there are different citieria one could establish, but the article acknowledges that. Yes, it may be a somewhat difficult topic to research, but that is not grounds for deletion. Sylvain1972 13:22, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletions.   -- John Vandenberg 15:49, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
 * '''Keep the list, but add the metric equivalent.
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletions.   -- John Vandenberg 15:50, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Everybody knows the largest church in the world is Charlotte Church--Perceive 03:01, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
 * lol Bulldog123 17:13, 4 July 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.