Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roman Catholicism in El Salvador


 * 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. — CharlotteWebb 18:30, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Roman Catholicism in El Salvador

 * Reasons the article should be deleted
 * This article is titled Roman Catholicism in El Salvador. The first paragraph says it is part of the worldwide Roman Catholic Church. Does anyone need an encyclopedia article to figure that out?
 * The second paragraph says how many El Salvadoran Catholics there are and the structure. There are something like 150+ countries in the world. Is there going to be a separate article for each religion for each country? Rosicrucians in Tibet? Jehovah's Witnesses in Bahrain? Scientologists in Tajikistan? This is really almanac-type information, not encyclopedia-type info. It belongs in a Religions section of an article on El Salvador, not here. At most, there could be a Roman Catholicism (statistics) article listing this type of information for various countries.
 * Gee, one bishop was killed sometime during a decade and the military persecuted a religious group during a civil war! How unusual! (And that info was only added recently.) Again, not "encyclopedia" material.
 * There are no citations or sources.
 * "Assassinated" is POV without sources.
 * The alleged reasons why he was "assassinated" are POV and unsourced.
 * The article says the bishop was assassinated "during the 1970's" in the civil war but it did not "officially" begin until 1980. Again, unsourced and POV.
 * This article doesn't talk about Roman Catholicism in El Salvador, it talks about alleged military persecution.
 * Without documentation, "persecuting" and "murdering" are POV and rumors.
 * Almost all editing activity on this article has consisted of adding categories.
 * Given that the article has been here six months, there has been ample time for it to be expanded if anyone wanted to.
 * RickReinckens 01:33, 20 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Information such an article should contain


 * Is there anything signficant, unusual or unique about Roman Catholicism in El Salvador as opposed to elsewhere?
 * Do they conduct Mass in languages other than Spanish?
 * Do they have any particular saints special to their country?
 * Do they have any religious feasts / festivals specific to their country?
 * Do they have any practices, rituals, etc., not commonly found elsewhere?
 * Who brought Roman Catholicism to El Salvador?
 * When? Where?
 * How did it spread?
 * Are there any synchretistic practices such as ancestor worship that often occurs in certain parts of South America among native peoples who are allegedly Catholic?
 * Does Roman Catholicism have any special recognition or status from the government, either officially or unofficially?
 * Attitude of other religions in El Salvador toward R.C. in E.S.
 * Attitude of El Salvadoran general public toward R.C. in E.S.
 * What percent of the population is Catholic?
 * Are there any Catholic universities, seminaries, etc.,?
 * Is it spread pretty evenly throughout the nation or is it concentrated in particular areas and if so, where?

These are some of the questions an encyclopedia article on "(any religion) in (any country)" should address.
 * RickReinckens 01:33, 20 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Strong keep and cleanup. Article may be poorly written, but it's still a notable subject.--TBC TaLk?!? 01:52, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep perTBC. Subject is important and AFD is not cleanup. Mitaphane talk 02:02, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep though I'd prefer Religion in El Salvador existed and the article look more like Roman Catholicism in the United States. FrozenPurpleCube 02:07, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, nominator makes the case for keeping. Also, he needs to read Oscar Romero. Gazpacho 02:35, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep but clean up as above. This is a pretty interesting, verifiable, and encyclopedic topic. --Wafulz 02:36, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. I originally de-prodded this article and added the Cleanup tag. I felt that the article was at least a mediocre stub that once somebody with more knowledge knew about it, could grow into a better article. I especially disagreed with the assertion that six months is "ample time" for it to be expanded, especially when there was no flag for attention. --Roninbk 04:04, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep An actual topic of interest.--T. Anthony 05:44, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete unless rewritten That the article has existed for SIX months without cleanup leads me to believe that such cleanup WILL NOT HAPPEN. Just because the topic is POTENTIALLY noteworthy (who knows if there's anything encyclopedic to say about RCiES? There might be nothing to say about it at all!) is not reason enough to keep a BAD article on said topic (or even off said topic as this article seems to go). Zunaid 15:17, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I think you need to give articles on countries in the developing world more time to grow. There is no Category:Wikipedians in El Salvador, the closest thing might be Category:Wikipedians in Honduras which has two people.--T. Anthony 18:18, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Claim: "Just because the topic is POTENTIALLY noteworthy is not reason enough to keep a BAD article on said topic". Response: Yes it is.  -- Plutor  talk contribs  19:19, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I've improved the article some and I even dealt with some of the problems the nominator mentioned. Although there's plenty of room for improvement.--T. Anthony 00:03, 21 September 2006 (UTC)


 * The very fact that there has been significant edits to the article after I depprodded and listed with AfD STRONGLY disproves you theory Zunaid. The only thing wrong with this article is that no one paid any attention to it. How many other articles out there, maybe even future FA's would be lost just because no one gave them any love in their infancy? --Roninbk t c # 06:58, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong keep per TBC. AFD is not cleanup. Zunaid, I don't find your argument persuasive since it's not a bad article, it's acceptable as a stub article. hateless 16:53, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
 * KeepYes, there is certainly room for articles about major religions in different countries. Roman Catholicism in the subject country has different issues and concerns than the same religion in the U.S. Important and verifiable.Edison 17:31, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Expand and Keep A religion in any subject country is important whether the article is small is insignificant. By that logic, even this article could be deleted Jews in Tajikistan --Ageo020 (talk • contribs • count ) 22:43, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep of course. Wikipedia does not expect articles to be perfect when new, or at any specific time later. Having an article in place gives a framework for improvement. The nominator offered a useful outline for the article. Wikipedia invites the world to contribute some of the requested information. Fg2 00:32, 21 September 2006 (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.