Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Christians' Hour


 * 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. Guerillero &#124; My Talk  00:09, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

The Christians' Hour

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Unreferenced article about a radio program that does not demonstrate the subject's notability. Indeed the claim of 5,000 listeners seems to actively demonstrate this subject is non-notable. Prod was contested without reason, so bringing here for discussion. Sparthorse (talk) 20:54, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete: No assertion of importance here. Calabe1992 20:56, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

i dont understand. need help. DON"T DELETE — Preceding unsigned comment added by Forums44 (talk • contribs) 6 January 2012
 * Delete, no references, no notability. NawlinWiki (talk) 21:22, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I've given Forums44 quite detailed help about finding reliable sources to demonstrate notability. If such sources can be provided, the article should be kept. Sparthorse (talk) 21:52, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 22:54, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 22:54, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 22:55, 6 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete: I found nothing that shows notability. SL93 (talk) 23:50, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete - no indications of notability, no references. MikeWazowski (talk) 00:12, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
 * DONT DELETE
 * http://christianstandard.com/2008/08/interview-with-bill-mcclure/
 * http://www.poeministries.org/pages/Lectures/NACC-07.pdf
 * http://books.google.com/books?id=-3UtqrX56rgC&pg=PA623&dq=%22the+christians'+hour%22&hl=it&sa=X&ei=8sIIT-zGO7GM4gTK4-CRCA&ved=0CDAQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22the%20christians'%20hour%22&f=false
 * http://books.google.com/books?id=gqf5JCmoBugC&pg=PA477&dq=%22the+christians'+hour%22&hl=it&sa=X&ei=8sIIT-zGO7GM4gTK4-CRCA&ved=0CDkQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=%22the%20christians'%20hour%22&f=false
 * http://books.google.com/books?id=iSJTLDDg0XEC&pg=PA125&dq=%22the+christians'+hour%22&hl=it&sa=X&ei=8sIIT-zGO7GM4gTK4-CRCA&ved=0CD8Q6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=%22the%20christians'%20hour%22&f=false
 * http://books.google.com/books?id=HLMh1f9UPUMC&pg=PA50&dq=%22the+christians'+hour%22&hl=it&sa=X&ei=8sIIT-zGO7GM4gTK4-CRCA&ved=0CEYQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=%22the%20christians'%20hour%22&f=false
 * http://books.google.com/books?id=orLnzk37nVgC&q=%22the+christians%27+hour%22&dq=%22the+christians%27+hour%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=G8QIT__WNYOj-ga33tGvAQ&redir_esc=y — Preceding unsigned comment added by Forums44 (talk • contribs) 22:18, 7 January 2012 (UTC)  — Forums44 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * So fix it and include those sources per WP:INCITE. If you fear the article will be deleted before you can do this, I suggest taking a copy in your userspace to work on. -- Trevj (talk) 11:07, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete I don't think these sources above have anything to do with the article itself. Don't try to trick people.Trongphu (talk) 23:12, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment: Please remember to assume good faith. - Dravecky (talk) 23:32, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
 * not trickForums44 (talk) 21:09, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
 * i guess you not read them yet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Forums44 (talk • contribs) 04:14, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep per the Google Books sources listed above establishing verifiability and a degree of notability. Apparently a very long-running "pioneering" religious radio program with widespread coverage. The article, as it stands, is abysmal but cleanup is not a matter for AfD. - Dravecky (talk) 23:32, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
 * thankyouForums44 (talk) 21:09, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep per the Google Books sources listed above establishing verifiability and a degree Forums44 (talk) 12:54, 13 January 2012 (UTC) — Forums44 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Comment - please don't try to vote twice; you've already made your position known above. As to the sources provided, I don't believe they confer any notability - they just confirm existence. That is not the same thing as notability. MikeWazowski (talk) 18:07, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete 5,000 listeners?... Let us try after it has 50,000 or more. History2007 (talk) 20:17, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
 * why 5000 is not enough????Forums44 (talk) 22:47, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Which is a valid point, actually. WP:BIG and all that. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 12:27, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Notability isn't determined by something's quantity of members, but rather by the quality of the subject's verifiable, reliable sources. Forums44 (talk) 12:44, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
 * more sourceForums44 (talk) 12:44, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
 * http://www.newspaperarchive.com/SiteMap/FreePdfPreview.aspx?img=101833854
 * http://www.gospelbroadcastingmission.org/images/Interview.pdf
 * http://www.therestorationmovement.com/hoven.htm
 * Comment - can we get an admin to close this already? We've got a clear consensus to delete here, and it's two days past the date this should have been closed. MikeWazowski (talk) 23:33, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
 * almost delete votes before i show source now vote most keep Forums44 (talk) 12:41, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep the first google books source is good enough for me, since it is more then a passing mention in an independent reliable source. It can be supported by the more flimsy other sources. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 12:24, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
 * vote change to Delete Forums44 (talk) 12:30, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep i reconsiderate to keep per the Google Books sources listed above establishing verifiability Forums44 (talk) 12:32, 16 January 2012 (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.