Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/National Council of Churches of Nepal


 * 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 Christianity in Nepal. Several participants definitely believe this organization should be notable, and it does seem plausible that this type of organization would be, but they had difficulty bringing forward the independent, reliable sources offering significant coverage to show this. Among the majority who did not express support for keeping the article, there was a division between deleting and redirecting, but the later trend of the discussion was for redirect, so that is how I am closing. RL0919 (talk) 16:52, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

National Council of Churches of Nepal

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Doesn't cite any sources. Fails notability. Yeti Dai (talk) 19:02, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nepal-related deletion discussions. Yeti Dai (talk) 19:02, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:10, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:11, 17 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete as does not meet notability and no significant coverage was found in my search. I had previously prodded the article. Here is my prod statement: It is proposed that this article be deleted because of the following concern: "Non-notable religious organization. Created by serial unreferenced stub creator. BEFORE completed; best findings = a few listings in Google books confirming it exists, but that isn't enough coverage. Please add good sources if you deprod or the article will go to AfD. Thank you." DiamondRemley39 (talk) 19:46, 17 June 2021 (UTC)


 * if its a member of the World Council of Churches, as is claimed, then it is probably notable.  Sources do not have to be online or in English.Rathfelder (talk) 23:04, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
 * But they have to be in existence. And where are they? I haven't read anything about membership in one organization that makes another organization notable. DiamondRemley39 (talk) 13:31, 19 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep: there are several sources in Google Books. There are some that are snippet view that can't really be added to the article, but appear to give significant coverage. But as mentioned above, the sources do not have to be accessible, they only have to exist. StAnselm (talk) 17:16, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
 * The snippet view of the source you name [1] shows that the organization is covered on one page of a book contributed articles. Indeed, it gets one weak sentence. I cannot find the article ("Inclusion, Christianity, and the Nepali State" by Mahendra Bhattarai) as a standalone online, and it may never have been published elsewhere. My entire snipped view is: "The National Council of Churches of Nepal NCCN is said to be [emphasis mine] championing the cause of human rights, freedom of faith, harmony among different religions, a stringent selection and review of foreign aid, contextualizing one's faith to the 'cultural' environment and the right to register and be recognized as a Christian organization. The National Churches..." It starts talking about an organization called the "National Churches." The work was published by a non-governmental organization called "South Asia Partnership--Nepal." Is "said to be"? The article in this book has no actual information on the organization. This coverage is insignificant and thus does not help notability question at all. DiamondRemley39 (talk) 21:46, 20 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete:There is no relevent information and citation on this article. There are similar onces which are making wikipedia a bin. It needs to be cleared as soon as posiible as wikipedia is not a news site. I request everyone to stay away from their personal belief and take decision as per the demand.Curious boy np (talk)
 * Keep -- There is enough available on-line to confirm that it exists. If it does it should be notable.  Peterkingiron (talk) 15:30, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
 * What indicates it "should be notable"? Why would we assume an organization with no significant coverage is notable? DiamondRemley39 (talk) 21:46, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
 * it exits does not mean it passes WP:Notabilty. The depth of the coverage by source should be considered. Address, mission, vision of the organization available online are just trivial mention as in these sources (These source are not reliable as well) : . ~ Yeti Dai (talk) 09:27, 22 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete: Not notable. WP:INHERITORG applies. Just because the parent organization is notable doesn't mean it is to.  Clog Wolf  Howl 13:03, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Merge with Christianity in Nepal. Two lines of information that has no independent notability does not need a separate article. nirmal (talk) 02:53, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
 * In some cases I'd be all about that, but this "article" has no sourcing and provides no information, so I see merging as negatively affecting the quality of that article. DiamondRemley39 (talk) 11:22, 24 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Christianity in Nepal. As a national organisation, it likely has some form of noteworthiness, even if it is not notable per our policies. Sources exist, ex., although I'm not sure that one is independent, or the mention here, which indicates this might warrant some form of an indication on the relevant target page. The redirect should be kept in either case per WP:ATD and as a logical search term. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 00:28, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Who said it is a national organization? If it is, are all national organization nooteworthy?103.10.31.45 (talk)
 * RandomCanadian, Your first link is to a directory listing at the parent organization. It doesn't "source" anything. The second link won't load for me. If the article can't be properly sourced, why trash the other article with a merge of unsourced content? DiamondRemley39 (talk) 12:31, 29 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Merge and Redirect to Christianity in Nepal.4meter4 (talk) 00:12, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. The discusion has hone much longer now. I request the deletion oor redirect soon as I feel this is the conclusion of majority here. Very few demands for Keep with no better reason.Still no reference/citation/notability available.Curious boy np (talk) 11:38, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep RS available online; AfD is not clean up.


 * Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 12:44, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't believe these references as moist have publicly denied its relation to cristianity time and again. Yes, you may be doing this as per your faith. I request you to be secular not a defender of Christianity. Secularism doesn't mean Christianity. We Nepalese are very well known on these topic. I request speedy Deletion else adding reference verified by a national daily of Nepal which works on Nepalese interest with proof.110.44.121.41 (talk) 18:51, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Peter303x (talk) 21:06, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I concur with the IP editor that these do not provide significant coverage. There's a bit of "I like it" evidence in some of the "keeps" above. Goldsztajn at least provides some sources, so let's examine those:
 * Has one sentence that cites NCCN. What are the specifics of that citation? Footnote says: "K. B. Rokaya, PowerPoint presentation, copy provided to author, October 10, 2007." Not independent. I would question reliability as well. Furthermore, it's not significant coverage of the organization. It just shows the secretary has estimated the number of Christians in Nepal. Nope. Not significant.
 * The blog of "Global Ministries," which is a joint venture of the UCC and Disciples of Christ. They describe National Council of Churches of Nepal as: "a new partner church of Global Ministries." So it fails as an independent source. Most significant in the blog post statement is "After the cease fire, the NCCN played a major role in bringing all faith groups into the process of “building a new Nepal.”" Do we have a reliable source for this? The blog of a partner church, with no byline, is not a promising source.
 * Same secretary quoted. Not about the organization. Not significant.
 * Page 93 has some information about it, including its mission. Not significant.
 * Passing mentions linked in AfD aren't adding to the notability discussion. Regarding "AfD is not cleanup" and "sources exist" arguments above: Those are arguments I've seen with the weakest keep arguments and weakest "sourcing" for years. When I want an article kept and I stand behind my vote, I typically add relevant information to the article. I'll add what very little of value is here, because the keep voters haven't. Then we can at least remove some tags.
 * I ask the "keepers" to reflect and consider what the article contributes to Wikipedia/the world. Right now, it's nothing. If decent sourcing that proves notability is found in the future, the article can be recreated. DiamondRemley39 (talk) 15:53, 30 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Merge or Redirect to Christianity in Nepal.Alex-h (talk) 08:10, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. Sufficient sourcing. In any case, the body representing a major religion in a country should be seen as notable. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:12, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
 * It isn't "the body", though. It is "a body." It is the country's chapter of a large organization that is made up of some, but not all, Christian denominations. DiamondRemley39 (talk) 19:44, 5 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete or Redirect to Christianity in Nepal. No sufficient citation and notability! I would like to ask all to see no of page view of this article! So less. It can be recreated in future. I have a question similar as above, "What will this article contribute to world? What is the significance?" Please delete this article soon as the discussion has gone very long and large concensus is known! Please try to be free from our personal religious point of view. Thank-you!202.51.76.81 (talk) 20:48, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete or Redirect to Christianity in Nepal. The independent coverage is just not sufficient for a standalone article. Should probably be mentioned somewhere in the linked article, like "yeah, that organisation exists and has something to do with Christians in Nepal". The bar for such a mention is much lower than for a standalone article, imo. --LordPeterII (talk) 18:18, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Redirect, as per LordPeterII. MrsSnoozyTurtle 05:12, 11 July 2021 (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.