Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Moroni's promise


 * 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   redirect to Book of Mormon. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 06:37, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Moroni&

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

I can find no evidence of real-world notability for this phrase. There are plenty of ghits for it, but I'm not turning up any reliables sources for this one, just a lot of primary sources from LDS websites and blogs. Furthermore, the article is little more than a block quotation and a brief snipped explaining the name. At best this could be merged somewhere, but even then, I'm not at all certain Wikipedia is the place for this kind of stuff - it's borderline promotional material. Shereth 20:10, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge to LDS Church / Question Was this article given a prod or suggestion tag prior to AfD listing? I didn't see a prod or suggestion tag in the history though I could be wrong.  I'm not sure how "inside" this term is, and I know your intentions are good, but it might have been useful to encourage interested editors from the LDS project to find good cites prior to listing here. Townlake (talk) 20:36, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Update Merge / Redirect per Good Ol'factory below. Townlake (talk) 03:39, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * It had been tagged in May 2007 for improved references and sat for 6 months with no help until an IP edit removed the tag. I did not see how adding a tag this time around would result in anything better. Shereth 21:08, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks - didn't notice that on earlier reading, I see it now. I'd rather see this merged than deleted based on my own perspective, but we'll see what others say. Townlake (talk) 21:21, 16 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Merge/redirect to Book of Mormon. I work in the Latter Day Saint project, and I don't think the subject of this article is notable enough to warrant a self-standing article — it can easily be merged into the already existing section at Book of Mormon. (More churches than just the LDS Church use the Book of Mormon, so it's probably better to merge to Book of Mormon than LDS Church.) Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:58, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - the information here is already at Book of Mormon. No need to merge - it is essentially already been done.--Descartes1979 (talk) 04:55, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Book of Mormon as a reasonable search term. Jasynnash2 (talk) 11:19, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  15:53, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I've heard this used to me by LDS missionaries, so I'm not surprised to see it be fairly commonly used. The article as it stands now is unsourced, so unmergable.  This book, which has been cited repeatedly uses it solely for the promise to Joseph Smith that he would find the gold plates, and is not discussing the topic of the article, so should be disregarded.  This book uses it in this sense and could be a source, but google scholar isn't aware that it has been cited before and it published by Lulu.com, so essentially self-published by the author.  I'd discard.  This book also uses the phrase, but again google scholar isn't aware of any citations and it is also from Lulu.com, so self-published and I'd discard.  Much better, page 122 of The Complete Idiot's Guide to Understanding Mormonism has a small section on the promise that describes it as "critical to LDS philosophy". If it is critical, there ought to be good sources. But I didn't find any better sources myself.  If the sourcing doesn't amazingly improve soon, I recommend delete then redirect as a plausible search term, with no merge occuring.  GRBerry 19:52, 17 June 2008 (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.