Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/United Assembly of Christ


 * 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   speedy delete per CSD criterion #A7..  So Why  17:24, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

United Assembly of Christ

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

I don't see any notability per guidlines. ChildofMidnight (talk) 00:19, 26 February 2009 (UTC) Cunard (talk) 07:46, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete A Google search for "United Assembly of Christ" and Chesterfield turns up nothing but this article. I believe this article is a hoax. Pastor Theo (talk) 00:37, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete My news search shows nothing for "United Assembly of Christ", non news searches lead to a church in Delaware.--kelapstick (talk) 00:45, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete unsourced and no evidence of notability. JJL (talk) 00:50, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete No evidence of notability anywhere Lets  drink Tea 00:57, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:CHURCH - it deserves no more than a brief mention in the city's article. flaminglawyer 01:08, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment As that's a failed guideline it isn't suitable to cite in AfD discussions. Nick-D (talk) 07:59, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, the way it looks to me, is that a church member/pastor decided to advertise their church on Wikipedia. That doesn't work. Tavix (talk) 03:47, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete and throw a SNOWball at this one per WP:HOAX or WP:N, depending on whether or not it actually exists. Actually, scratch that, the idea that we can't prove it exists means it fails WP:V. Firestorm  Talk 05:34, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: The creator,, placed a hangon tag on the article and wrote on the talk page:


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions.  —Cunard (talk) 07:50, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions.  —Cunard (talk) 07:50, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete and salt the article. I speedy deleted this article on 24 February per CSD A7 as the article made no claim of notability and didn't provide any sources. Nothing seems to have changed, and it seems likely that the editor will keep recreating the article to promote the church. Nick-D (talk) 07:55, 26 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete blatant promotion (even if it is for God), but seeing it had been speedied before, better delete it outright through AfD, and liberally season with sodium chloride. Ohconfucius (talk) 08:54, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete It's a organization that doesn't assert notability and has so far proven to be unverifiable. I'd like to remind the author that promotion can be done without trying to convert people. Merely saying a place exists when someone wouldn't otherwise have known is promotion too. But that's not relevant the article already fails two basic criteria. - Mgm|(talk) 10:35, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete Non-notable church, unverifiable, tastes like spam, previously deleted with no changes, WP:SNOW, etc... tagged as a textbook A7 and borderline G11Mister Senseless&trade; (Speak - Contributions) 16:31, 26 February 2009 (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.