Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ULCO Seminary (U.S.A.)


 * 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 redirect to Universal Life Church. Content remains behind the redirect for selective merging into the main. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 13:28, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

ULCO Seminary (U.S.A.)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable organization. Fails WP:ORGDEPTH, WP:AUD, and WP:BRANCH. Me-123567-Me (talk) 18:45, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 18:48, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 18:48, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 18:48, 28 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep. Reasons a) The world is more than just cyber. ULCO may be somewhat weak online, but is strong offline; b) >21.000 followers on facebook alone are quite some weight; c) We should be careful not to discriminate against religious groups which have been in existence for decades, even since before we were born, only because they are partly old fashioned and more “at home” in real life than in cyber; d) As far as I can see the article is not commercially oriented, neither is it violating any other rules; e) Parts of ULCO (Arnulf’s) seem to be tuition-free and non-commercial in their nature. So this indicates even more that this whole thing is a notable church seminary and alumni group and not just a little fun issue. 213.184.122.100 (talk) 12:56, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
 * An organization being around for decades DOES NOT equal notability. They need significant national media coverage at a minimum. Me-123567-Me (talk) 19:14, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Father Rahim, the Dean of ULCO’s Arnulf Seminary is not unknown, as is the church. See here or here or here. They are a super liberal church, having been around for decades with ULCO having >21.000 followers online and the church behind >1.2 mio. followers. That’s not nothing ;-) 213.184.122.100 (talk) 20:59, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Those articles look self-authored. Show me independent news sources. Major news publications such as the Washington Post or the New York Times. Me-123567-Me (talk) 22:10, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

UTC)
 * Keep. An institution of higher education, and we have normally considered all such to warrant an article in WP, unless there is some special reason. (The school does not award formal degrees, but its courses lead to ecclesiastical ordination by its church, which is more or less the equivalent.) It is certainly true that there are cases where a separate article is justified, but the amount of information is so little that a combination article is preferred according to one of the more realistic provisions of WP:N, and we use this to avoid making articles for individual components of most schools except the largest and most famous, because there is generally little to say except directory information. But this is not such a division, but rather the educational institution under control of the church, just as other religion-bases tertiary institutions are of their churches. I am unclear why they label themselves as an alumni group--it's s true we do nto ordinarily make articles for alumni associations, but this seems to be a combination pf an alumni association and a college. It's well known that the Universal Life Church does things a little less formally than most such US organizations. This is not e reason for deleting, but for being flexible and keeping.  DGG ( talk ) 23:44, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete This organization is not the Universal Life Church, the notability of which is not in doubt (weather it structurally makes sense to recognize it as existing in a substantial way has of couse gone through much debate). The school guidelines exist for schools that actually exist and run standard courses. It is not a free grant of notability to every diploma mill on the face of the planet, and this is a diploma mill par excelence.John Pack Lambert (talk) 07:15, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Withdrawal due to defamatory statements in this discussion: I am the author of this article. To call an alumni group and a network of schools which only accepts postgrad university students for the most part tuition-free (Arnulf’s) a “diploma mill par excelence” is a disgrace and defamation in its worst form, especially when the slander obviously comes from a Mormon, a faith which is in itself under discussion due to different issues. Yes, there are ULC-affiliated groups (the ULC itself is a notable church, even if you dislike its unconventional approach) to whom this may apply. Here, this is not one of them. To call this very institution of all things names is shocking and makes me ask for deletion due to malicious attacks instead of a real neutral discussion. I will delete the content as far as I can as a user and ask someone who is in charge to delete the article from Wikipedia immediately. ULCO and Arnulf’s are too precious to have their dignity hurt in such a digusting and sad way. I don’t want to see this end in a lible action in court due to traducement of a religious organization. 213.184.122.101 (talk) 09:52, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete - as hard as it is to follow what this article is about ("It's the ULCO", "It's the ULC Theological Seminary", "It's an alumni group", "it's a school", "Arnwulf is a spin-off of the ULC", "ULCO is for tuition-based matters, but Arnulf's is tuition-free, but criticism of ULCO is somehow an attack on Arnwulf. Online sources are linking ULCO and Arnwulf to specifically Christian matters, ULC is not a specifically Christian church. What online references were in the article before the attempted blanking by an IP user purporting to be the article creator do not mention ULCO, and are merely about the ULC (and the use of the offline references suggest they would be similarly focused on the ULC.) We're lacking any real sign that there's anything there. --Nat Gertler (talk) 16:07, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I reverted the blanking. Me-123567-Me (talk) 17:08, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
 * DELETE IMMEDIATELY. It was no blanking but a radical shortening. As far as I was told, it is my right to use Wikipedia without an account. I am the author of the article, and having been experiencing the vicious discussion style here I kindly request for an immediate deletion of the article. I am not familiar with Wikipedia but would never have expected that criminal proceedings due to traducement of a religious organization could be the result of a discussion here, especially since some truly faithful people who asked me to help them with the Wikipedia do not feel amused at all about being ridiculed. Don’t let us forget that we discuss a matter of faith where words can insult people badly. So there was never a blanking, just a radical shortening, and as the author I request an immediate deletion of the topic. It was my naive idea to believe that the topic would be welcome here. Now I learnt that the opposite is the fact. So, please set an end to this nonsense before more religious feelings get hurt and delete the article immediately, please. Be blessed. 190.106.130.39 (talk) 20:29, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
 * You are free to use Wikipedia without an account, but when you claim to be the account user who created this article, we don't have a way to verify that unless you log into the account to make your comments. As for deletion of the article, had you blanked it or otherwise asked for deletion before this discussion had been started, it might have qualified for a speedy deletion... but given that this discussion has been started and some reasonable keep votes have been made, it cannot be speedy deleted on this basis. You seem to be suggesting legal threats, please read our "no legal threats" policy. Some of the threats you claim are ludicrous, there's no way even if inaccurate that such a statement would be a criminal concern, for a US-based contributor on a US projects - and anyway, deleting the article would not delete this discussion page, where the supposedly offending remark is, and thus do nothing to avoid any lawsuit or charges. Any concern you have about "religious feelings" might be aimed best at whoever it was who went after an editor for being LDS. --Nat Gertler (talk) 21:53, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep. Sorry IP, but as everyone can see I am the author of the entry which is being discussed here. Of course I believe this institution is reputable and notable. Ok, the world of these churches is somewhat confusing, especially since the ULC has an abundance of spin-offs, officialy accepted ones, tolerated ones and completely “independent” ones. Now why did I write this entry? Simply because I know, thanks to a family member (who is a journalist), what is going on there. Yes, the ULC is a somewhat weird church. But it is a church which has been allowed to hold course studies, since 1974 even with a legal blessing. Some other spin-offs fought similar legal fights and hold the same right - and then there are those who are only into making money. Now, what is ULCO Seminary (U.S.A.)? It is a hub. A meeting point for students, postgrads and alumni of ULC (and legally clean) ULC spin-offs. A place where the “real” students of valid course studies meet and where courses, meetings etc. are coordinated and organized, all non-commercially and self-organized. ULCO Seminary (U.S.A.) is therefore not one school or one education provider, it is a self-governed umbrella organization which brings all respectable students from within the chaotic ULC world together. This is also the reason why their external picture a little bit confusing and there is not much coordination or money to provide a glamorous facade. However, more than 20.000 people on their facebook site are an indication that they are not what we could call small. They also keep their house clean and cast everybody out who is just a “title hunter” with one of the more shady ULC spin-offs. Some of the reputable spin-offs are even tuition-free and grant access only to people with a university degree. Again, the ULC-world is colorful, and ULCO Seminary (U.S.A.) is “home” of the reputable students at the notable ULC and/or its reputable spin-offs. So the whole endeavor is reputable. If it is notable according to the Wikipedia rules is another question. I would say yes. Whatever the IP wanted to achieve here is a little bit confusing. But one thing is correct; we are talking here about faith issues, so let us be careful with the words we use. Even a weird church like the ULC and its more serious spin-offs are churches. We should keep this in mind. Klaus Bells (talk) 01:54, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Universal Life Church. They've operated a diploma/ordination mill for decades (Hunter S. Thompson received his infamous doctorate from them), but I'm not sure what this group (called an "alumni association", and looking like a corporate subsidiary of the Church that exists for legal purposes) is even supposed to be; the refs appear to be about the Universal Life Church.  power~enwiki ( π,  ν ) 22:52, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty (talk) 17:27, 8 March 2018 (UTC) — OnSpeech (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at 15:36, 9 March 2018 (UTC).
 * Merge to Universal Life Church I can't find anything more about them than directory information in books, and the straight GHits aren't exactly an improvement, even though I left off the "(USA)". Probably some of this material isn't duplicated in the main article. Blatantly not notable in its own right, however. Mangoe (talk) 17:56, 8 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. Evidently an alumni group which is neither notable nor of public interest. Offering no detectable services, to find in directories and social media with just some internal/private talk, only not notable matters are being posted. Merging with or redirecting to Universal Life Church seems to be inappropriate as this alumni thing has no reputable/reliable ties to this freak church. 185.32.222.13 (talk) 19:58, 8 March 2018 (UTC)
 * DELETE. This whole thing is nothing but a small and negligible alumni group of one or more churches and a waste of time to discuss their notability ;-)) Universal Life Church has obviously legal or not so official copy-cats using their name. So to which of these is this alumni group connected to. Only one? Ten? Thirty? A million? ;-) They may be ok, they may be crap, what they definitely are: not notable. Significance for Wikipedia not apparent. Significance for anyone? Not apparent. Sorry guys, Wikipedia is above your head :-o Elalma (talk) 20:40, 8 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep Easily passed WP:GNG. What the subject is or isn't doesn't matter. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:39, 8 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Can you point to what sources make you feel that way, ? Because I'm not seeing sources in the ULCO Seminary that live up to that. Source on the ULC or on the Christian Universal Life Church, yes, but not on this organization. --Nat Gertler (talk) 23:24, 8 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I notice you have not challenged any of the non-policy-based !votes, when it's for delete. Religion in North America and Directory of departments and programs of religious studies in North America are enough for me. Also, WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:28, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
 * See WP:OUTCOMES, and no personal attacks, please. Me-123567-Me (talk) 01:51, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
 * There was no personal attack. Noticing an editor's behaviour is, while not commenting on content is inspecting motives. I'm fine standing on my earlier ~Vote. Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:10, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Except you didn't "notice an editor's behaviour"; rather, you made up some crap about an editor, seemingly because you didn't like being asked a reasonable question. As the editor about whom you made up said crap, I can tell you it's not appreciated. What would be appreciated, however, is if you answered the question about what you found in the sources you are using as the basis for your WP:GNG claim, so that I can reconsider my !vote if there is real reason to. --Nat Gertler (talk) 16:12, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
 * "I notice you have not challenged any of the non-policy-based !votes, when it's for delete." is a glorious combination of irrelevant, snide, and false (check my post of 21:53, 3 March 2018.) The two sources you list appear in the article to be referencing information about Arnulf, not about ULCO. Have you checked those sources to see if they cover ULCO? I just tried using Google Book Search to check that book, and it got no results, but Google Book Search is spotty. WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES is about schools, not alumni organizations. --Nat Gertler (talk) 01:55, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I'd appreciate you clarifying what the subject actually is, as I'm not 100% sure at this point. power~enwiki ( π, ν ) 00:38, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep, please. Excuse my English, please. I use the deepl. com translator because my English is not so good. But I can help to clarify the situation, because I am a ULCO alumni myself and have learned that a discussion is going on here. I studied at a seminar of a Christian secession of the ULC in my native language (subsoil because where I am, apostasy is severely punished) and I am still happy with it today. But of course there are also funny ULC churches. That's why there is an alumni group for seriouly ULC alumni, where you can still exchange information worldwide, even when your education is over. ULCO does not belong either to ULC or to any of its separate churches. It is an alumni organization of volunteers for volunteers. Now I don't know if this is relevant for Wikipedia. But our mailing list alone is huge and on Facebook we Alumni and friends are as far as I know, with about 22000 people. I don't know if this is venerable enough for Wikipedia. But as an affected person, I can say that I was always well treated, satisfied and happy to remember my seminars. This is how others do it and that's why there is the Alumni Group ULCO. But it's all self-organized and thus slightly chaoticly. My wish would be that we are not mistaken for lunatics just because we have learned something from churches schools that are not mainline churches. We are also people and freedom of faith applies to those who are chaotic and organized themselves. As someone in a country where freedom of religion is not guaranteed, I know what I am talking about. Thank you for your attention and may the Lord bless you and Wikipedia. 2001:AC8:26:4:102:239:0:A9 (talk) 10:09, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep Good heavens! An endless discussion because of an alumni group? Really? As far as I can see this specific group is neither dangerous nor questionable. Therefore I support Walter Görlitz. Other users in this discussion explained convincingly what this group is about. But more than that, stop wasting time with such minor matters and religion bashing. Religious freedom includes belonging to any kind of church, even weird ones. Btw., merging with Universal Life Church seems not to be an option as this group is open to different branches of this religious community. So merging would be sort of connecting two institutions that may or may not be closely related. But we’re here not for guessing or creating theories. Cheers. OnSpeech (talk) 15:32, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Walter Görlitz pls. delete this claim. I am not a SPA, however rather new to the English Wikipedia. A rainy day off makes me work on religious topics. It would be nice if you could delete the SPA claims since I don’t feel well with it. Thank you and God bless. OnSpeech (talk) 15:56, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I won't remove or strike it. You have few edits to the English project. The rules for other projects are quite different to the rules for ours. I am simply pointing out your brief history on the English project to the closing administrator. Transparency is the most important thing. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:42, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Ok, I accept the rules. I have been on Wikipedia projects sporadically for quite a while, but ok. However, I feel not well with this situation and also not with reverting my friendly two topics on your talk page. Especially the entry about the one word in the Reformation topic is important to me. I just want to use a rainy day off in Germany to do some edits on religious topics in the EN WP. Would be nice to get support or guidance instead of having friendly messages deleted. God bless OnSpeech (talk) 16:57, 9 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Merge to Universal Life Church - this is entirely a tempest in a teapot, a non-notable "organization" subordinate (??) to a border-line notable "organization". A complete mess with requests from representatives of the "organizations" to delete.  The only real choices are to delete or to merge a line or two into Universal Life Church. Smallbones( smalltalk ) 19:00, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete I live in orthodox country; attended theology class (evangelical) when was in the US for six months. We discuss with my friends from that time that here is discussion. My school was friends with ULCO like you are member of other association. I here by testify that ULCO is alumni association with members that come from various school. It is n o t  [not!) Universal Life Church, some may be but far far not all. Free group students from many UL church dennominations. We do not need having Wikipedia. We use and meet and exchange. That’s it. Do not know what should help be on Wikipedia? Delete is a good idea.  87.239.248.37 (talk) 13:24, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Please note: This user has no other contributions outside this discussion. Me-123567-Me (talk) 23:36, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Merge to Universal Life Church. The drama above is quite incomprehensible. A one-paragraph article about an alumni organization? It's obvious that this belongs into the main article.  Sandstein   22:33, 15 March 2018 (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.