Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Napoleon and Protestants


 * 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. There are still concerns about notability, but the content concerns are gone per WP:HEY and I think a slightly consensus is in favor of having a separate article rather than merging into Protestantism in France. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 11:33, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Napoleon and Protestants

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Appears to be pure original synthesis and hasn't been edited in months, thus there seems to be little chance of improvement. CapitalSasha ~ talk 07:41, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:03, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:03, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:03, 29 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete -- This has all the feel of a bad essay, all built around one quote, which is in fact irrelevant. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:23, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Article has been rewritten. Srnec (talk) 05:15, 14 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete. Based on Google and Google Scholar hits this does appear to be a notable topic (cf. Napoleon and the Catholic Church and Napoleon and the Jews), but in its current state this article adds nothing to Napoleon. Looks like a premature content fork and, as it's unsourced, I don't think there's any point in a merge. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 18:57, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Article has been rewritten. Srnec (talk) 05:15, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep based on 's improvements. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 05:34, 14 January 2017 (UTC)


 *  Delete  - I'd be happy to change my !vote if something was done to improve the article and its sourcing, as this could be notable. But as has been pointed out, notability isn't obvious, and the material included doesn't add much to existing Napoleon articles. Smmurphy(Talk) 14:41, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Article has been rewritten. Srnec (talk) 05:15, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep - Its a good start, good work! Smmurphy(Talk) 15:29, 14 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep. Topic is notable. There is room for lots of improvement. Srnec (talk) 00:39, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
 * André Encrevé, "Protestantisme et bonapartisme", Revue d'histoire du XIXe siècle, 28 (2004).
 * Christiane Guttinger, Les protestants et Napoléon, Les Amitiés Huguenotes Internationales.
 * Patrick Cabanel, Napoléon et les protestants : l'institutionnalisation du pluralisme religieux, Napoleon.org.

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 04:58, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
 * delete unless. This page would need a WP:HEYMANN to get my !vote.  It could support such an expansion, and possibly a name shift to Protestantism under Napoleon.  note that we do have Napoleon and the Jews, and Dechristianization of France during the French Revolution, which, appropriately, is about the Roman Catholic Church.  The problem is that this article at present is paltry, often outright wrong ("Although there was really no Huguenot minority to speak of..." is  simply incorrect,) and therefore is of no value in its current form.E.M.Gregory (talk) 12:49, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
 * if you have time to do even a light cleanup, perhaps most efficiently by cutting it down to a sourced stub, ping me to revisit. Certainly this topic can support an article and ought to have one.E.M.Gregory (talk) 12:52, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I rewrote it from one source. It's a start. Srnec (talk) 04:53, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Note to closing editor please give this one a little more time. Because the topic truly is significant.E.M.Gregory (talk) 12:54, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 05:23, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Not notable, already at Protestantism in France. Bertdrunk (talk) 16:11, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Er, no, It doesn't, actually. That article was the first place I looked upon finding this topic at AFD.  The article Bertdrunk links to in fact follows the section on Louis XV with a section on Apology to the Huguenots in 1985.  More to the point, the Louis XV section  is a brief sentence with a "Further Information" link to  Persecution of Huguenots under Louis XV.  What Protestantism in France  needs is a new subhead Napoleon and Protestants as now written, linked from a brief summary of the info now on this page.E.M.Gregory (talk) 23:19, 14 January 2017 (UTC)


 * WP:HEYMANN Thanks to User:Srnec for revisions that make this a reliable, solidly-sourced article that can be expanded in future.E.M.Gregory (talk) 23:19, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Now strong keep -- This article is now clear and to the point. The only other outcome that I could contemplate would be a merge.  When I first looked at this article, I could see no redeeming features.  All that has changed.  Peterkingiron (talk) 17:26, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Merge to Protestantism in France. There's no question that the instant article has been significantly improved since the nomination.  But I still don't see why the material here wouldn't fit better in an improved version of the (proposed) target article.  And this merge would be a significant step in the improvement of that article.  NewYorkActuary (talk) 22:14, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
 * The article is short; but the topic is notable.E.M.Gregory (talk) 10:43, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Also, Protestantism in France is a huge topic. That article, once finished, could support several sub-articles. This would be one. I would have no strong objection to expanding this article to cover the entire revolutionary and Napoleonic periods—or even the whole period from 1787 to 1815. Srnec (talk) 13:17, 20 January 2017 (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.