Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/North Canton United Methodist Church


 * 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 no consensus.  Sandstein  10:00, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

North Canton United Methodist Church

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Seems completely normal and un-noteworthy. tahc chat 23:52, 4 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment. Let's be polite here.  This is an article created by a new editor, who edited a few times in 2014 and 2015 but has less than 50 edits.  I note a couple process problems about Wikipedia welcoming this editor, namely that the editor has not been welcomed, and they have not been notified of this AFD.  It is horrid, IMO, for editors to receive their first real interactions with other editors with the nomination for deletion of their first article.  Most editors who are going to read this are among the lucky ones who randomly got a good experience when they started, while most arrivals get a bad experience or two or three and then don't come back.


 * About the article, it is a church founded in 1871 which is relatively old, for the United States, and there are lots of other articles on historical yet newer U.S. churches, so it is quite reasonable for an editor to think it would be notable. I hope editors participating can make a real effort to find on-line and off-line sources to help out here.


 * And, I would seriously like to ask that no one votes "Delete". If it is necessaary to be negative about this as a standalone Wikipedia article, please advocate merger and redirect instead.  Possible merger targets would be the community where the church is located, and List of Methodist churches in the United States. -- do  ncr  am  00:54, 5 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Notes
 * The church's "mother church" mentioned on its webpage is Washington Hill United Methodist Church, which appears clearly wikipedia-notable by its historic brick church and its 1834 founding and more ready information available about it. Start with Washington Hill's website.  So a good possibility is to have one article about Washington Hill with a section on North Canton as a redirect target.
 * There's some chance the church could be included in a state or local historic district. It is not very likely by its location, but it is possible it is within the National Register-listed Canton Center Historic District which runs along Route 179, and North Canton is part of Canton.  The NRHP document with its detail is not available right now as the NRHP website is down, I think.  Is any other National historic district listed at National Register of Historic Places listings in Hartford County, Connecticut a possibility? -- do  ncr  am  01:15, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 00:27, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 00:27, 8 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete -- With the greatest respect to the last contribution, I fear that this is merely a NN local church. I am willing to be persuaded otherwise.  Peterkingiron (talk) 11:32, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Please see WP:INSIGNIFICANCE. What is your argument that there are no redirect targets?  Unscintillating (talk) 02:34, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   11:52, 12 October 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep. Locally notable, historically significant church. I've just added a little to the article. This church is no less significant than hundreds of equally or less notable churches that have articles merely because they're listed on a register. WP needs more articles like this, not fewer. Station1 (talk) 19:04, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sarahj2107 (talk) 09:38, 20 October 2016 (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.