Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yahweh's Assembly in Messiah


 * 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 merge to Sacred Name Movement. There's a vague consensus here for a merge, but less clear how much should be merged. Whoever does the merge will need to make a judgement call on that. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:40, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Yahweh&

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Reason

I think this page should be deleted because of WP:NOTABILITY and because it doesn't have any real sources. Let it be merged with the Sacred Name Movement article. Thanks. In Citer (talk) 13:37, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:13, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Missouri-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:13, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:13, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:13, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Merge -- This reads as if it is a single congregation, which has splintered from a larger movement. The movement probably qualifies for an article as being a small denomination, but local churches are generally NN.  Peterkingiron (talk) 15:35, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep - they're a church, and a stand-alone and referenced subject.  Shouldn't remove for arguably reasons of personal taste or "I don't like".  They're notable enough, it seems.  Gabby Merger (talk) 06:08, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 01:24, 30 June 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JAaron95  Talk  17:30, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
 * delete Flag me if independent sources can be produced. I have looked and can find no reliable news reports or secondary sources. The problem as I see it is that any group can declare itself a church, but to merit a Wikipedia article a church needs to be written up in reliable, independent secondary sources. I don't doubt that this church is real and significant to its members, I simply have tried and failed to locate reliable secondary sources.  No RS, no article.E.M.Gregory (talk) 16:30, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete or merge (very little), as notability has not been demonstrated. The only sources given are the congregation's own website and a "Yellow Pages"-type directory. No objection to merging the home page link to Sacred Name Movement. – Fayenatic  L ondon 22:07, 15 July 2015 (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.