Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/St. Philip's Anglican Church


 * 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. Whereas the church is most likely notable, given that the article is almost empty and had copyvio from the first version (which needed to be revdeleted), it is safer to delete it. Everybody is welcome to start the article all over again.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:33, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

St. Philip's Anglican Church

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Unambiguous advertising, likely copyvio. No claim of notability Angry Bald English Villian Man (talk) 00:46, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
 * SNOW Delete Exactly why I PROD it, but you removed the PROD to nominate for discussion. Anyway I still think Delete. Creator seems to be related to the church too.  Legacypac (talk) 01:09, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:35, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:35, 15 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete Clearly fails GNG and SIGCOV. Obviously copied from a "History of..." or similar. DerbyCountyinNZ  (Talk Contribs) 01:49, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete. Copyvio from http://stphilips.org.nz/stphilips/about/history gadfium 05:51, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - I have deleted the copyvio text, it's so blatant that it can't stay there. That does not of itself mean that the church is not notable or could not have a decently-cited article, just that this bit of copying is not it. Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:29, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete -- all we have now is a list of clergy, none of whom have articles: clearly NN.  Peterkingiron (talk) 19:40, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment article as created was indeed a copy-and-paste from curch's website, probably by a well-intentioned parishoner. However, the church's 1902 building is old, by  Aotearoa standards.  It was given to a daughter parish, moved to a nearby town, then, when that parish merged back into St. Philip's, the 1902 building was given to a Maori congregation which, form what I can tell, still uses it. In other words,  From all I can see, the original St. Philip's building is notable. With all the changes of name (of both parishes and towns that morphed into suburbs, and municipal boundaries) plus the fact that the building is called by all names of parishes, locations, and whatnot in sundry sources, I don't have time to deal with it.  Hope someone in Auckland will.  Cheers.E.M.Gregory (talk) 21:21, 16 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions.E.M.Gregory (talk) 18:07, 18 November 2015 (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.