Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of road churches in Finland


 * 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. (non-admin closure) ––Redditaddict69 (talk) (contribs)  06:32, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

List of road churches in Finland

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NOTDIR. Not even sure if the term road church is even notable. Ajf773 (talk) 06:53, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Ajf773 (talk) 06:53, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finland-related deletion discussions. Ajf773 (talk) 06:53, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Ajf773 (talk) 06:53, 30 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep. It is valid content that could be included in Road church article, but apparently was split out due to length.  It is a non-controversial editorial decision to split out sections from a list-article when it gets too long.  The concept of road churches and their numerosity are both interesting to me, FWIW. --Doncram (talk) 07:42, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
 * P.S. The top-level list includes source https://www.tiekirkot.fi/ which covers "tiekirkot" in Finland (i guess "kirk" means church, "kirkot" I am guessing is its plural, and i suppose "tie" might mean road); the source was not copied to the split out article but that is just a matter for editing. --Doncram (talk) 07:45, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
 * P.P.S. Try (.
 * I google "tiekirkot" and happen to click on one of the results pages and choose to translate the page to English, and drill down and down and down (and at some point am at ), and come to page with translated content "Meløy church is located in Fore and Meløy sokn in Bodø Domprosti. It is built in wood and was built in 1867. The church has a long and 500 seat. The church has a listed status list (after 1850). Architect: H.Mosling / JWJordan." This one happens to be in Norway not Finland, but is about a historic church on its country's version of a national register of historic places.  It is my impression from traveling, that throughout Scandinavia (which technically does not include Finland, but why would it be different there?) there are these historic churches of the state Protestant religion, often/usually on their own out in the countryside, which seem obviously historic and architecturally significant and worthy of national historic registry listing, which either are under-utilized nowadays or are perfectly well-kept and continuously utilized.  Probably they were always intended to be "road churches" serving a large area, to which church members would travel by roadways where those exist.  Some accessible by boating across a fjord or whatever.  These are certainly worth listing. --Doncram (talk) 08:08, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
 * This concept started in Germany in the 1950s and was copied in Finland in the 1990s. In the German Wikipedia de:Kategorie:Autobahnkirche some of the churches are even named "Autobahnkirche" because they have been built near autobahn highways, but in Finland the concept is a bit different, I think. These are all normal churches except that they have agreed to be open during summertime and they have information or a guide for visitors. I don't have an opinion on the notability issue. The singular is "kirkko". :) -kyykaarme (talk) 23:01, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * That may be a case of the term Road church being notable, but the list article doesn't inherit this. Ajf773 (talk) 01:10, 5 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete - Wikipedia is not a directory Spiderone  09:39, 30 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Do you think it would be possible to create articles on a couple of Churches that are listed on the article? Also describe how. I am sure that this is a notable subject but we really need some blue links for the named Churches. Anatoliatheo (talk) 07:20, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep List needs to be cleaned up, not deleted. Road church are prevalent in Denmark, Germany, Estonia, Finland, Sweden, Norway, and Russia. Aurornisxui (talk) 15:04, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Not one of these churches is notable. If we were to have an indiscriminate list of every church in the UK, it would be rightly condemned. I see no difference here. Spiderone  23:32, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Not so: some or perhaps all of these are Wikipedia-notable for individual articles, as supported by User:Aurornisxui's info below.  And probably all are perfectly fine as items on a list, i.e. list-item notability can be lower threshold than individual article notability.  Perhaps you could change your !vote here, User:Spiderone?
 * Some editors might prefer for Wikipedia lists to be built from the bottom up, i.e. create individual articles on items and only list those, building up. It is perfectly fine (and better IMHO) to develop from the top down:  create a list-article and allow for development including gradual splitting out of separate articles on items of the list.
 * No one wants it to be an "indiscriminate list", but if you think it is, then that is a matter for editing and discussion at its Talk page, to perhaps pare off some items eventually. Probably best to let this one be developed for a while, first.
 * About U.K. churches, fine, see new list-article List of churches in England, which somehow we did not have until I just created it now (converted from a redirect). --Doncram (talk) 15:55, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
 * That isn't a list of churches, it is a list of lists. Ajf773 (talk) 01:10, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Note Adding links to Finnish articles on the churches. Aurornisxui (talk) 15:16, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Note I checked the first 10 of these churches on the Finnish wikipedia article (used for the English version) and 8 out of 10 are listed on the National Board of Antiquities, which is a Finnish government bureau see Museovirasto (in Finnish). So list is notable based on WP:NBUILD (churches are not just merely on a list of buildings on the National Board of Antiquities site, but have a write up about each see Alajärvi Church as example). Aurornisxui (talk) 17:06, 2 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep - A few links need to be developed but the subject is notable. Anatoliatheo (talk) 11:15, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
 * How so? Spiderone  23:12, 5 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep Road churches are a notable phenomenon and many of these churches are notable. It just requires translation and wikilinking. For instance, one of the churches is the Espoo Cathedral build in 1480 but it's just not translated and wikilinked. --Pudeo (talk) 22:38, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Road churches aren't notable because they are road churches, they are notable because each of them are coverage by independent secondary sources, as per WP:NCHURCH. Among this whole list, there isn't any evidence of this. Ajf773 (talk) 01:10, 5 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep. If all the individual churches had been notable and had articles, this list would have been unnecessary – we could have replaced it with a category instead. But since the phenomenon is notable but all the individual manifestations aren't, collecting all of the road churches in Finland in one article is a good way to give an overview of the subject. /Julle (talk) 17:53, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
 * No, in fact that is quite the opposite. If there was notable entries then a list and category would be sufficient. The purpose of Wikipedia is not to be an indiscriminate list of every single thing on one topic. Currently it offers almost no value to any reader. Ajf773 (talk) 18:55, 5 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep as a valid notable subject for a list Atlantic306 (talk) 18:06, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Explain your vote properly instead of making a vague statement. Ajf773 (talk) 18:55, 5 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Stop badgering about every comment in opposite direction of what you want. --Doncram (talk) 09:24, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Don't tell me what to do. Ajf773 (talk) 09:29, 6 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Note If the list is useless, it is because it needs to be edited, but not deleted. People interested in churches, churches in Finland, the concept of "road churches", architecture, religion, historical buildings, genealogy, and tourists in Finland during the summer could find this list useful.Aurornisxui (talk) 21:41, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Please read WP:ITSUSEFUL Spiderone  23:12, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I have and I'm not using "useful" as an argument to keep it. But someone up thread said it was of no interest to anyone.Aurornisxui (talk) 02:19, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
 * So what are your thoughts to making the list less useless? My thoughts personally would be remove all the non notable entries, although that would be pretty much the whole list. Ajf773 (talk) 23:52, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
 * What would you consider to be notable? Maybe the list needs to be changed from Road churches (noting the delete comment below) and changed to historic Finnish churches, i.e. churches that are on the Finnish National Board of Antiquities. I checked and there is no such list on Wikipedia.Aurornisxui (talk) 02:24, 6 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete While the concept of "road church" might be a notable subject, this is just a list that shows which Finnish churches were open for visitors in the summer of 2012. I checked the list briefly and found two churches that were not on the list for summer of 2018 on the official website https://www.tiekirkot.fi/tiekirkot/ (there might be more, I didn't keep checking when I found the two). The list for summer of 2019 is not published yet, and I don't think old lists from previous years are accessible anymore. For the list to be useful for readers, it would have to be updated every year which doesn't seem sensible (would churches be removed from the list or marked as "former" road churches?). Readers and tourists can see the list on the website. -kyykaarme (talk) 22:54, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Your objection seems to me to be only that the set of road churches changes over time. That poses no problem for a list-article.  Yes, list-articles do need to be maintained and updated.  For all or almost all articles about historic churches or other historic sites, policy/practice is that we include currently listed and formerly listed places on the same list, although maybe indicating former status somehow differently.  With the current title of article, it would be appropriate to include all current and former churches which are notable road churches (where notability might be defined at a lower level than their having a separate article about them).  It is also possible that this list could/should be converted to being a list of historic Finnish churches, whether road churches or not, as has been suggested above.  However outright deletion of the article would not advance Wikipedia and is not needed.  I think that there is consensus of fact that many/most of these are individually notable churches, and removing the one existing list of them would not be helpful. --Doncram (talk) 09:24, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Scott (talk) 20:56, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Strong delete It could not be more clear. This is not even an article. This is a directory. Not even sourced! Trillfendi (talk) 22:55, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Trillfendi: It references Suomen tiekirkot 2012 ("Finnish Road Churches 2012") by fi:Kirkkopalvelut? /Julle (talk) 00:09, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
 * You’ve gotta be kidding me. All they did was type that in the reference tag. They didn’t even try to source it correctly. Or any source for that matter. This page is a mess and not suitable for Wikipedia in this format. If anything it should’ve been a speedy deletion. Trillfendi (talk) 00:28, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
 * The source itself is a directory. A primary source. Not sufficient for notability. Ajf773 (talk) 03:55, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Per definition, we know that this was not suitable for speedy deletion, as that is not the way to go for anything that would end up as an so far inconclusive AfD discussion. Also, given that writing encyclopedic articles is something that has something of a learning curve, I see no reason to not assume they did indeed do their best with the sourcing, given that the creation of it was the fourth edit from the user in question and how to indicate the source for an entire list in a footnote is far beyond what most newcomers figure out how to do. /Julle (talk) 01:47, 7 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Comment - I have yet to see anyone successfully explain how WP:NOTDIR can just be ignored for this particular list. Also, I have yet to see any evidence that even one of these churches would pass GNG. If that is the case, then we just have a directory of non-notable churches. Spiderone  19:50, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I see another editor, in an attempt to assist the article, added links to two Finnish cathedrals. However I don't particularly believe that cathedrals fit into the category of road churches. Not even the articles themselves admit this distinction. Ajf773 (talk) 20:11, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
 * That editor was actually me! I'm trying my best to find some notability in these churches. I'm also not convinced that cathedrals belong here and therefore I am still keeping my delete vote. Spiderone  21:17, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
 * NOTDIR does not apply because it simply does not apply. These are notable churches, and they also happen to be "road churches".  The list does not include phone numbers and church service hours, i.e. the kind of temporary ephemera that the NOTDIR guideline or essay or whatever it is was written to address.  What specific quote from NOTDIR do you think applies?  I will probably disagree.  Also, see ongoing  Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of San Francisco Municipal Railway lines (2nd nomination) for other current AFD discussion where some editors assert NOTDIR applies, and IMHO that view is properly and completely refuted by knowledgeable other editors.
 * I think that some editors are simply not agreeing that many of the individual churches are probably individually wikipedia-notable (while IMO the discussion has established that several/most/perhaps all are). And some editors are not agreeing that any list of churches in Finland is acceptable (I and others have offered this could be moved to simply "List of churches in Finland" and that there the "road church" designation could be noted as an attribute for some), but of course Wikipedia should allow a list of churches.  Also if the list is kept restricted to "road churches" then it remains valid as a split out of the Road church article.  Sorry, I see no way at all that this should be deleted.  Maybe really what is going on is that some want the list-article to be improved right away, while wp:AFDISNOTFORCLEANUP.  The topic has been established to be valid, IMO, so those who don't like the list should perhaps give it a negative tag or two, or post about its defects at its Talk page, but I don't see merit in continuing this AFD.  It is ready to be closed (Keep), imho, based on facts, policies, etc. discussed so far. --Doncram (talk) 23:23, 8 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep 40 of the churches on the list have blue links to their own articles. It is clearly a valid list article.   D r e a m Focus  18:19, 13 January 2019 (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.