Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Carthusian hermit/Hermits of Saint Bruno

 __NOINDEX__
 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was delete. Salvio Let's talk about it! 15:28, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

User:Carthusian hermit/Hermits of Saint Bruno


Article draft abandoned by editor. I thought we could move it to the main space, but the subject appears to be entirely non-notable; the only source (a parish newsletter) that mentions it states it was a private way of life chosen by the proposed founder of the community--whose existence I cannot prove. Drmies (talk) 17:28, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - I started out trying to improve this, but Drmies is right, the sources are lacking and I find nothing worthwhile on Google, either via a general search or in Google News archives. - Burpelson AFB ✈ 17:34, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure that Google or Google News hits are the best method of determining notability for an order of hermits, which (I would think) would attempt to keep its interactions with the outside world to a minimum. I don't have time at the moment to pursue this further, but perhaps Google Books or Google Scholar might be a better resource to check? Or -- does the Vatican Library have an online presence with a seach function? Beyond My Ken (talk) 18:40, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I couldn't find anything on Google books. -- Klein zach  01:39, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I checked, BMK, but couldn't find anything. I'm particularly fond of small orders (even if they don't brew beer), but I don't see any hope for this one. The organization, even as far as angels ken, is simply too small--if it even really exists at all as a 'recognized' outfit (whatever that may mean). Drmies (talk) 04:34, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks for checking. Beyond My Ken (talk) 06:10, 14 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:FAKEARTICLE Secret account 18:39, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:FAKEARTICLE. Also stale (2008). -- Klein zach  01:39, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Beyond My Ken (talk) 06:10, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Move to Wikiproject Abandoned Drafts Looking over a few things from a web search, I think this is an issue where you need sources not available on the internet. Silver  seren C 14:13, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
 * But how do you find them then? I searched LexisNexis, for instance--not a single hit for our subject. Likewise nothing (as in zero) in Gale's General Reference Center (search for hermits of saint bruno--without quotation marks to increase results). It is unlikely that there are book publications on them, there is nothing that I can find in any kind of news search--and the outfit is not that old that it predates the internet. The most insightful thing I found is this, but that's obviously not a reliable source and in no way establishes notability--and the wording is so vague that no real facts can be derived from it--not a place, not a number of members, really nothing. There is nothing we can base an article on. Drmies (talk) 15:18, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
 * We would have to wait until an editor local to the hermitage appears (or an existing editor travels nearby) who has the ability to look for sources. Either that or new sources are created in the future. It is also possible that some editor has a book that discusses them. Since it's clear they exist, but they don't currently meet the notability guidelines, it would be a best to place it into the Wikiproject, where it can be slowly worked on with what's available and we can wait for more sources to become available. Silver  seren C 21:23, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Sure, re: moving, but I don't think it's clear at all that "they" (the books? or the hermits?) exist--one hermit does not an order of hermits make, and orders live and die, sometimes very quickly and not noticeably. If this were an order from some remote place, or from a remote time, maybe--but it's not. I had a hell of a time writing Inkamana Abbey, and the internet was of limited use there--but there were sources, and I got a fair number of them. In this case, there's nothing: from what I can tell, there was one guy, and he started something, but it wasn't followed up to any noticeable level, and I doubt very much that there was a future there. Drmies (talk) 02:42, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Drmies makes a convincing argument for the nonexistence of sources to convert this into a decent article; without those sources, it will always be an abandoned draft.  Nyttend (talk) 18:08, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. I thought about the option of putting this in WP:Abandoned Drafts. That is only reasonable if there is some hope that the faults of the current draft could be corrected by an average editor who had some spare time and access to a library. What we have here is a basic lack of notability that a well-intentioned editor won't be able to cure. No objection to userfying this draft for anyone who proposes to work on it and has some ideas of how to proceed. It seems that there may be one guy who had an idea for starting a religious order but could not follow through (or could not find enough support for the order to be viable). Wikipedia is not for promotion of new ideas that have not yet found success in the external world. EdJohnston (talk) 18:31, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Move to Abandoned Drafts: Per Silver Siren.   Ebe 123    $talk Contribs$  09:52, 22 October 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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.