Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/V. H. Lewis (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Tone 16:14, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

V. H. Lewis
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Relisting per Deletion review/Log/2020 July 11. The original nomination was based on notability concerns. Procedural nomination; I'm neutral. T. Canens (talk) 02:23, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 03:15, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 03:15, 19 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Procedural close and relist the first AfD. There should be a G4 equivalent for renominations to get a delete result. This closed as a keep 9 days ago. And then moments ago the deletion review also said the original AfD was "no consensus at best" yet it should be relisted (the nominator cited WP:BADNAC). I get it, however a relist is not a renomination so this should be closed. The first AfD should have been relisted as the close of the drv ordered. Lightburst (talk) 03:26, 19 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete – Fails WP:BASIC, and English Wikipedia presently provides no presumed notability for religious subjects in its notability guidelines. My own source searches are only providing name checks and passing mentions (e.g. this article), and primary sources, none of which establish notability. Note that the the subject also goes by the title, "Dr. V. H. Lewis", but source searches including the title, including various customizations in searching, are providing more of the same, along with a few snippet views of primary sources such as those from the Journal of the General Assembly, which is published by the Church of the Nazarene, General Assembly. Simply put, the subject does not meet any notability guidelines to qualify for an article. Name checks, fleeting passing mentions and primary sources do not establish notability.


 * Per my objective assessment, none of the sources provided at previous AfD discussion actualy establish notability per Wikipedia's standards of notability. Only one independent, reliable source, published by The Oklahoman, actually provides what may be considered by some as significant coverage. However, I feel that this article falls a short of that requirement. Regardless, notability hinges upon a subject having received coverage in multiple independent, reliable sources that provide significant coverage, not just one . North America1000 14:51, 19 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep. He held the highest office in the largest Wesleyan/Holiness denomination in the world. That seems fairly notable. Kevin Rector (talk) 15:11, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
 * But see my counter-argument below. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 06:38, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. The sources are very weak, the issue is whether being the General Superintendent (Church of the Nazarene) is enough to meet WP:NPRIEST as in "Are the head of a major religion." The term major religion redirects to Major religious groups, and I don't see the Church of Nazarene listed there... so delete. He was a head but of a minor religion, so he needs to meet GNG, which is not shown due to next to no significant/in-depth coverage in sources found. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  06:38, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete I commented on some possible sources in the previous AFD but did not return to cast a !vote. I am in agreement that the sourcing is just not there to support this article, that it is not sufficient to meet BASIC/GNG. I do not agree that there is inherent notability here. As a second choice, redirect to General Superintendent (Church of the Nazarene) where V. H. Lewis is listed (though that article has sourcing problems of its own). --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 07:51, 26 July 2020 (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.