Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/St. Mary's Jacobite Syrian Church Vettithara


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 11:00, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

St. Mary's Jacobite Syrian Church Vettithara

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non notable, fails WP:GNG JMHamo (talk) 22:35, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as non-notable. The duplicate articles St.Mary's Jacobite Syrian Church Vettithara and Vettithara Kochupally should be removed as well. Bradv  23:08, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete: No coverage. Esquivalience  t 00:22, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions.  Vipinhari  &#124;&#124;  talk  05:27, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  Vipinhari  &#124;&#124;  talk  05:27, 10 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete -- It is essentially an orphan and does not even say where it is. The normal outcome is that we only keep local churches if they are notable for other reasons - architecture, contents, involvement in particular events, etc.  I see nothing notable about this.  Peterkingiron (talk) 16:02, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Merge a considerably trimmed version to Syrian churches of Kerala. There is a considerable whiff of Westocentrism here, if you consider how many totally non-notable US churches are able to easily establish "notability" by local papers etc, and how difficult it is for South Indian churches to demonstrate this from the internet, especially in the English language, given local conditions. Johnbod (talk) 15:17, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

bibinkvjacob 10:57, 12 April 2016 (UTC) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * keep - The page is edited and added more details, references also added in the current page including local news paper news. The presence of relic of Mother Mary in this church makes it famous and important. The rare portion of this relic is enshrined in only a few churches in the world. So this church cannot be considered as one amoung many. There is a limitation give the link of the newspaper news as the link of the local newspaper will be deleted automatically from their webportal after a couple of days of publishing the news. This article will be a usefull reference for the people who do the research about Soonoro Churches and Marian shrine. Following are the reference which shows the importance of this church.


 * keep - The page seems to be informative, this church is notable by the presence of Holy Relic of Mother of Jesus Christ. This churches attracts a lot of people every year during its feast days. This is one of the important church of Syrian Orthodox in Kerala. So this page should be keep as like this. The references in the regional language is true and can be accepted in the reference link. mathewsvettithara 13:43, 12 April 2016 (UTC) — mathewsvettithara (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * keep - St. Mary's Jacobite Syrian Church Vettithara is one of the important churches in Malankara Syrian Orthodox church. The church become an important one by the presence of Holy Relic of Virgin Mary. There is no dought that this church attracts many people. arunmathews84  20:58, 12 April 2016 (UTC) — arunmathews84 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 13:50, 13 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete as there's nothing solidly convincing to suggest keeping and improving, we can wait for a better article. SwisterTwister   talk  00:27, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep. I edited in the article.  It is clearly a notable church, a landmark explained in multiple sources.  I think it is even notable as a place atop a hill per wp:GEOLAND.  The suggestion to "wait for a better article" appears to be an acknowledgement that the topic is notable.  We don't delete stubs or weak articles on notable topics;  it is appropriate to tag them for improvement but this is not AFD justification. -- do  ncr  am  02:49, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisting based on new arguments from Esquivalience Yamamoto Ichiro (talk) 05:18, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as not notable and little coverage from any reliable or independent sources. Note that two of the keep votes appear to be from sock/meat puppets. Omni Flames   let's talk about it  03:08, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Yamamoto Ichiro (talk) 05:18, 23 April 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2016 April 23.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 05:43, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2016 April 23.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 09:09, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2016 April 23.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 13:47, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2016 April 23.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 18:26, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2016 April 23.  —cyberbot I  <sub style="margin-left:-13.5ex;color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS"> Talk to my owner :Online 23:08, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2016 April 24.  —<sup style="color:green;font-family:Courier">cyberbot I  <sub style="margin-left:-13.5ex;color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS"> Talk to my owner :Online 03:47, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2016 April 24.  —<sup style="color:green;font-family:Courier">cyberbot I  <sub style="margin-left:-13.5ex;color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS"> Talk to my owner :Online 08:26, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. Promotionalism for a borderline notable  church. The legend of St Thomas is applicable to all churches of this denomination, and just needs a link. Mowst of the rest of the content is advertising for church events. Having been built only in1930, it's not of historic stature.  DGG ( talk ) 22:27, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, &mdash; Music1201  talk  02:13, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. This does not pass my standards for historic church buildings. Neither it nor the village it is in are listed in DK's Eyewitness Travel Guide to India. Bearian (talk) 13:54, 10 May 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.