Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marian devotions


 * 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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:53, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Marian devotions

 * – ( View AfD View log ) •

content forking. Article is virtual duplication of Catholic devotions and other Marian related articles. Malke 2010 (talk) 18:24, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 22:44, 20 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep (and modify). Given that this article discusses Eastern Orthodoxy, it is not a virtual duplicate of Catholic devotions. The problem here is that:


 * Notability: The topic "Marian Devotions" is quite notable and deserves an entry in Wikipedia. This topic, is however, multi-denominational and not just Catholic.


 * Catholic devotions is just Catholic and can not absorb this article, else I would have voted "Merge". And Catholic devotions are not just Marian, but can involve other devotions.


 * I think the Catholic section should be made smaller by removing overlap, and the Eastern Orthodox section should be expanded. There is really much more than can (and I think should) be said about the Eastern Orthodox Marian practices. I just started to learn about that as I rewrote the Eastern Orthodox section of another article and noticed "100% copyright issues", as explained here. This AFD actually made me think it would be a good idea to learn more about the Eastern Orthodox and expand that section. That would be fun for me to do, and it will fill the information gap here. I should probably also write a section on Anglican practices, given that there is no mention of it here. So I think it would be good to expand the Orthodox section and add an Anglican section, specially referring to the more modern practices, while trimming the Catholic section.


 * And it should be point out that this nomination is part of "mass nominations" performed rather quickly, as discussed on Articles for deletion/Marian art in the Catholic Church, following other incidents. However, this AFD does spark interest in expanding the Orthodox and Anglican sections, and I will do that, as I trim the Catholic parts. History2007 (talk) 09:31, 21 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Speedy Keep per WP:SK #2.4 "nominations that are clearly an attempt to end an editing dispute through deletion, where dispute resolution is a more appropriate course". This article seems a better basis for this notable topic than its putative rival.  In any case, the matter should be resolved by ordinary editing and discussion, not by AFD.  Colonel Warden (talk) 10:53, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment: If you feel that this AFD was an excuse and an attempted deletion for other purposes Colonel, the broader question then becomes "what Wikipedia policies are there to respond to disruptive AFD tags"? Do you know what needs to be done to stop disruptive tags in general? One can issue warnings, but what if the warnings are shrugged off and tag generation continues? History2007 (talk) 12:59, 21 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment: There's no editing dispute. Do you have diffs?  The article in question is a duplication of many others. That is why it's being nominated.Malke 2010 (talk) 15:07, 21 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment: This may explain a few things Colonel: Talk:Blessed_Virgin_Mary_(Roman_Catholic), as well as the items it leads to. Malke: you have been having editing disputes on this topic for a while now, going back to Catholic views on Mary and before. The question is now about the appropriate Wikipidia policies needed to handle them. And I would note that the 2nd WP:POINT warning was just deleted by Malke.History2007 (talk) 16:05, 21 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment: This is about the article Marian devotions which is a near mirror of Catholic devotions. Comments should be about the merits of either keeping or deleting this article belong here.  Comments about Blessed Virgin Mary belong on that talk page where editors can still find the points I made that resulted in the new, accurate edit which still stands.  The "dispute" was your objection to the new edit because you don't allow any changes to that article, and you edit warred over it and made personal attacks.  You put a warning on my talk page and an administrator came along and pointed out edit warring behavior and threatened to block both of us, but your block would have an extra 2 hours for the personal attacks you made.  You've since refactored them after being asked several times to do so by the same admin.  Your efforts to save this article should be about the article, and not about trying to discredit my good faith efforts to remove bad articles from Wikipedia.  Other editors have noted for a long time now that there is a glut of redundant articles about Mary, nearly all obsessively centered on veneration, and all saying the same thing, the same text, linking to the same pages with more of the same text, and almost none of them are accurate or informative.  As a member of the WikiProject Catholicism it's hardly a stretch to know which of these could be deleted for the benefit of the project.Malke 2010 (talk) 18:49, 21 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep per comments above, & I think History's proposed changes are a good idea. Johnbod (talk) 13:41, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep all my comments have already been said, by History.Marauder40 (talk) 19:34, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep very clearly and obviously not a mirror--there is only a small overlap in content. And, of course, so notable that some of the subtopics are also.    DGG ( talk ) 16:04, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Not a mirror article, and it expresses both Orthodox and Catholic devotion. I think Anglican devotion should be added though. --Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 03:54, 26 November 2010 (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.