Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Youth Alive Australia


 * 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 Australian Christian Churches. Anything worth merging is available from the history. Randykitty (talk) 15:37, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Youth Alive Australia

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non-notable religious group, has had issues with the page for over a decade. Macktheknifeau (talk) 07:34, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:03, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:03, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:03, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete, the only sources I could find were unreliable or simple directory listings, fails WP:GNG and WP:NORG. Devonian Wombat (talk) 21:48, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep -- This looks like an unsatisfactory article about a notable organisation. The present content seems to make it appear to be a record label.  However, when one digs deeper into their website, the claim to be founded by Australian Christian Churches the leading Pentecostal denomination there with 1100 congregations; providing a year-out programme for young people to engage in ministry and youth leadership training.  This certainly does not sound like a NN organisation.  At worst merge to the denomination.  Peterkingiron (talk) 17:27, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 17:03, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Weak keep or merge per Peterkingiron. Deus et lex (talk) 22:34, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete No evidence GNG is met. The only independent source indicates it made #68 on the Australian iTunes chart, which I would say does not indicate inherent notability. Eldumpo (talk) 21:43, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment - it's not an album, it's an organisation. And there is a clear merge or redirect available here which must be considered prior to deletion (per WP:ATD). Please reconsider your !vote. Deus et lex (talk) 03:59, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes sorry, the iTunes reference was relating to an album/song from them apparently. I’m still seeing no suggestion GNG is met. Could be a candidate for redirection but would that not encourage re-creation of a non-notable article? Eldumpo (talk) 09:08, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
 * The possibility of a recreated article isn't enough to delete. ATD says if there's an alternative to deletion, it must be considered. Here there's a valid merge or redirect. Deus et lex (talk) 02:03, 4 April 2021 (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.