Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Spirit of Truth


 * 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. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:08, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

The Spirit of Truth

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Notability is dubious, I've removed a load of unsourced BLP violations, any objections to deletion?  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  21:32, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:09, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:09, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:09, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:09, 4 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete. Notability failure. References 1-3 are dead links, 4 is a passing mention and 5 is a disallowed blog. No other significant topic coverage found in reliable independent sources. Philg88 ♦talk 07:06, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment - The article was a trainwreck. It still needs a lot of work, but after a few changes just now at least it resembles something encyclopedic. My connection is terrible right now so I still have a lot more digging to do, but I do have to say I'm surprised finding sources isn't easier here. This is a meme that flies by my eyeballs on social media or in conversation at least a couple times a year since 2006. --&mdash;  Rhododendrites talk  |  23:16, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Weak keep - Given the Tosh.0, Howard Stern, Web Junk 20, and other less impressive coverage (even if their links are presently dead -- I'll get around to fixing that), and the high likelihood of additional sources (admittedly influenced by my own pre-AfD familiarity with the subject), I'd say it passes WP:GNG. Conceding "weak" for now, but hoping to change that when I or someone else can find more sources. --&mdash;  Rhododendrites talk  |  23:16, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment -- If kept, this should be renamed to The Spirit of Truth (program). As Spirit of Truth is a reference to the Holy Spirit.  Peterkingiron (talk) 14:31, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree that there is a problem with the title. For many Christians the Spirit of Truth is a reference to the Holy Spirit, for some Native Americans it is a reference to the spirit of the Earth or the spirit of the Universe, and for some Hindus it refers to universal compassion.  And of course there is the idiom, without caps, meaning "the intention" of the document as opposed to the exact specifications.--Bejnar (talk) 02:05, 13 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- John Reaves 22:54, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 16:40, 20 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete it has been two weeks and none of the sources that Rhododendrites suggested might exist have been forthcoming. So absent adequate reliable sources, this fails WP:GNG. See my comment above about not using this title if recreated. --Bejnar (talk) 17:19, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
 *  Weak keep Neutral Most of the citations have now been rescued, and I have added a link to the assessment (status: confirmed) at Know Your Meme. However, notability still seems borderline to me, and KYM rather than Wikipedia is a suitable resting-place for dead memes. If not deleted, it should be renamed as agreed above, e.g. "The Spirit of Truth (television)". – Fayenatic  L ondon 19:54, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes it is a confirmed meme, i.e. verifible, but the recovered citation sources still do not add up to notability. --Bejnar (talk) 03:16, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I've changed my !vote to Neutral on notability, as I don't want to stand in the way of a consensus to delete. – Fayenatic  L ondon 15:03, 28 July 2014 (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.