Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Restored Church of Jesus Christ


 * 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. Though I would disagree with DGG's assertion that a religious group is inherently notable; they should be evaluated with the same critera as any other type of article. henrik • talk  20:34, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Restored Church of Jesus Christ

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Not a notable org. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 01:29, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. Ism schism (talk) 01:34, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. It is (or was) a legitimate faction within the Latter Day Saint movement, and there are sources to demonstrate its existence. It is one of only two known factions ever to have broken off from the Cutlerite movement, after its leader tried and failed to take over the Cutlerite church.  If Wikipedia truly aspires to be a compendium of ALL things human, then there's no reason to exclude a legitimate, proven (to exist, or have existed) organization, no matter what its size or "notability" might have been. - Ecjmartin (talk)


 * Merge and redirect to the Church of Jesus Christ (Cutlerite) page. I'm not actually sure that enough of the references listed are NPOV - one is the sect's webpage, although the other is a list of religions that seems to be reliable. Essentially, the one reference is enough to verify it in a larger article, but the other isn't reliable enough to give it its own article. - Jorgath (talk) 16:10, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
 * That might be a solution. I'd go for that, if the concensus agrees, rather than see the whole thing deleted.  In fact, if I see no objections to this over the next day or so, I might just "be bold" and do the merge myself, since I wrote most of the Cutlerite article, anyway...  That would seem to solve this dilemma rather nicely.  Good suggestion, Jorgath! - Ecjmartin (talk) 22:35, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I could go with the merger. Prsaucer1958 (talk) 00:42, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep There are plenty of sources to demonstrate its existence.  It easily passes WP:GNG, WP:ORG, and WP:NTEMP.--ARTEST4ECHO (talk/contribs) 21:18, 24 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep, and keep as a separate article. any significant religious group with real existence should be kept. It's the only way to avoid bias. Otherwise, Wikipedia is left considering what religious differences are important, and that is none of our business. The only way to avoid that is to include articles like this.  DGG ( talk ) 04:06, 2 March 2012 (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.