Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scandal (theology)


 * 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 of the debate was keep. Mailer Diablo 19:07, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Scandal (theology)
Non notable concept; dicdef. Rory 0 96 (block) 23:05, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Changing to keep per expansion, but I can't withdraw because of the delete vote below. --Rory096 03:40, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete or move to Wiktionnary. Grafikm_fr 23:08, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Muchly expanded. You may want to view it before you decide. Goldfritha 00:02, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

''This AfD is being relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that a decision may usefully be reached. Please add new discussion below this notice. Thanks!'' Mailer Diablo 06:03, 27 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Strong keep after expansion. Concept is a valid encyclopedic topic and by no means non-notable in its field. Thanks to Goldfritha for the good work. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:43, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, no longer a dicdef after expansion. --Ter e nce Ong 07:33, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Seems encyclopedic now that it is expanded. --Ed (Edgar181) 12:06, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Looks good to me. Mystache 12:27, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Needs more work, but is clearly a notable and defined concept in Catholicism. &mdash;999 21:28, 27 April 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.