Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/True Jesus 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. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:13, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

True Jesus Church

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Per the Meta thread Massive, 100+ project cross-wiki spam effort by Jose77, and per local notability policy. This doesn't have reliable, third party sources; it's citations are to bible passages and internal publications. A search finds that there are some mentions of this organization in the broader context of religious splinter groups from China (and one mention on a website that tracks cults), but little that is substantively focused on this organization.

Even if sources were to be found, this article still needs to be deleted and re-created from scratch because 1) the person who authored it appears to have a serious conflict of interest (more on that in the Meta thread), 2) it is constructed entirely upon unsound sourcing practices (afformenetioned bible passages and tjc publications), and 3) it is written, some sections in particular, more as a recruiting document than an encyclopedia article. It is not, and should not be, savable in this form.

Please note that I will also be filing AfDs for the "True Jesus Church in ____" articles in a separate AfD.  S ven M anguard  Wha?  22:22, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions.   S ven M anguard   Wha?  22:37, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Support Delete the page is unencyclopaedic and about a subject of incredibly dubious notability.SPACKlick (talk) 22:46, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:40, 24 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep -- This appears to be a Chinese denomination. I am far from convinced by the desirability of keeping some of the national satellite articles as free-standing ones.  It must be born in mind that the activities of unregistered churches in China has to be partly clandestine, so that the published resources will be scanty.  Nobody really knows how manhy Christians there are in China, but estimates run into 10s of millions, possibly even higher.  If this church has only a fraction of that number, it will be very significant.  Peterkingiron (talk) 13:53, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Peterkingiron: As someone that has studied that issue academically, I can tell you with absolute certainty that the clandestine nature of Chinese Christian churches is not a reason for low to non-existent coverage in third-party sources. The notable underground churches in China are, in fact, extensively covered by third party sources, especially those that the Chinese government views as significant enough to go after. (My personal opinion is that the CCP has a very, very poor understanding of the Streisand effect, and runs afoul of it often.) Even more in this case, where the organization is aggressively marketing itself, I would expect coverage if this were indeed a notable organization.  S ven M anguard   Wha?  17:51, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete as spam and failure of WP:GNG Secret account 18:19, 29 January 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.