Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Westminster Presbyterian Church (Decatur, Illinois)


 * 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. A Google Books search result is insufficient; specific sources must be given. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 03:34, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Westminster Presbyterian Church (Decatur, Illinois)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non-notable church lacking GHits and GNEWS of substance. Fails WP:ORG. red dog six (talk) 03:35, 18 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep - This is the collegiate church of Millikin University, which at the Church's founding, was Presbyterian (and is still affiliated). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fondsdorgue (talk • contribs) 03:37, 18 November 2011 (UTC)  — Fondsdorgue (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Keep I would tend to agree with Fondsdorgue on this one, status alone passes the bar, plus listed a couple of books, etc. It helps to NOT use the search links in this AFD and instead use "Westminster Presbyterian Church" Decatur, Illinois.  This isn't a little church started last year out of an old warehouse.  Dennis Brown (talk) 15:32, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:33, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:33, 19 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep since the nominator obviously wasn't able to find the Google hits. But there are 1000 hits on Google books. I'm adding a reference now. StAnselm (talk) 00:41, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Most individual churches fail to be kept in AFDs. There is no automatic notability just because a congregation dates back to 1825. I do not find in WP:ORG, the relevant notability guideline for congregations, or in WP:N, the genera; notability guideline, any provision for a church having automatic or inherent notability just for being the "official church" of some college or university. If there are multiple reliable and independent sources with significant coverage (not just the claimed "thousands of Google book hits") than identify them here. The article was only created yesterday, and an article does not have to spring into existence in perfect form. The AFD will run 7 days, plenty of time to find suitable references, if they exist. Passing mention, or listing of upcoming events from press releases, do not count for much, nor do publications by the church. Edison (talk) 01:32, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, why don't you look up Google Books yourself? I've added one reference to the article, I'm sure you'll be able to find some more. StAnselm (talk) 02:27, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * For your convenience, the link is here. StAnselm (talk) 02:32, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * It is up to those advocating keeping an article to demonstrate its notability. Linking to a Google Book search is insufficient. If there is any substantial coverage it is buried in the mass of passing references and cookbook listing. Edison (talk) 04:22, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I've heard this mentioned in Afd discussion before. Is that a policy? I would have thought that, if anything, WP:FIXTHEPROBLEM suggests the opposite. StAnselm (talk) 04:38, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Speaking only the issue of linking to a google book search (I still say keep on different grounds, above), this isn't valid as a means of citation as it isn't specific and it literally can change from day to day. Linking that way implies that Google is doing the "significant coverage", which isn't the case.  Even linking in a discussion is a weak argument: The list is a tool, not proof.  Pointing to the specific books that can be found within that search is 1) permanant (the book still has the text even if Google quits indexing it) and 2) relevant, assuming the book actually covers the subject matter.  In short, you link to the content, not an index of possible content.  It takes more work, but WP:V requires at least something more concrete than the list.  Dennis Brown (talk) 23:30, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Also, that search brings up lots of books that mention Westminster in one place and Decatur in a completely different location. :-( -- SarekOfVulcan (talk) 14:46, 28 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete as lacking significant coverage in multiple independent third party sources. Feel free to ping my talk page if these are added. Stuartyeates (talk) 22:02, 25 November 2011 (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.