Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Revelation religion


 * 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 delete and redirect to revealed religion. Seraphimblade Talk to me 03:10, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Revelation religion

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Neologism, phrase does not seem to exist outside of article creator's opinion. It's not a speedy deletion candidate though, so here we are. — coe l acan — 06:28, 17 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment I think perhaps the person was thinking of Revealed religion and possibly this could be a redirect to that.--T. Anthony 09:44, 17 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment: The phrase, "revelation religion", does exist in a blog and a forum. However, it is up to the author,, to provide references to reliable sources that use the phrase. --Kevinkor2 09:47, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - it's a neologism not referenced anywhere - Tiswas (t/c) 13:53, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - A redirect to Revealed religion may be pertinent, as above - Tiswas (t/c) 13:55, 17 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete - do not redirect, if it's an improper term, it can be confusing, and as an encyclopedia, we do not want to do that. Part Deux 17:41, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree with Part Deux here. We do not want to reinforce mistakes. We make an exception when it's a very common mistake that we expect many people to use as a search term, but this is not the case here. A redirect would make things worse. — coe l acan — 17:44, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Redirect to revealed religion. Not a common term, but it has been used in scholarly sources; there are some examples on JSTOR from the 1930s and before, and here's one 2004 economics paper (PDF). It seems a plausible enough search term for me, and since there's no need to mention the term on the revealed religion article I can't see how confusion would result. EALacey 18:21, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * r per EALacey ffm ✎ talk  13:36, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Redirect per EALacey - clearly a synonymous term.--Ioannes Pragensis 19:42, 18 April 2007 (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.