Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Roy Gordon Lawrence

Why comments moved
I moved the above comments from the AFD subpage, because people kept putting comments (sometimes unsigned), at the very top. This is disruptive, and messes up the flow of the discussion. Everything above was originally written by somebody else. Also, it appears these comments were by people directly involved, and not regular wikipedians. --Rob 07:58, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Keep
Keep: What is really very stupid is to delete 90% of the page during the discussion. I keep puting it back so the Wikipedia community can see what is being discussed. Some one with an agenda keeps removing the page so how can people decide if it should stay or go? Makes no sense at all! Let the people decide and let them see what they are supposed to be judging as an article. Right? &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.139.46.4 (talk &bull; contribs).

some of the other delete comments come from the small group Lawrence now teaches. Obviously, they respect him as their Bible teacher, but do not want others to know or they may not come to this church or stay. Which begs the quesiotn, who is watching the children? Almost all the deletes I recognise (initials and names) as people who belong to the Roy Group.

STRONG KEEP
original was too wordy and it was cleaned up by some very gifted Wikipedia editors. It has a valid place here. As mentioned, why pages and bio stubbs on RC pedophiles while we delete the ones on the Protestant at THE REQUEST of the member of the church where he now ministers. For the record, Andyru is as biased as anyone and put up the Wikipedia page (just an advertisement really) for the church where Lawrence teaches. Get this, Lawrence is doing a series, at least ten parts, on triumph over temptation. Facts are facts. Who am I to speak - I am the Senior pastor who Lawrence tried to replace early 2004. He resigned before we could fire him. Andyru may appear under other names to get what he wants - or he may have other Ottawa church members help him sway this discussion.
 * 'Follow- up Comment:' I am not denying that I attend the church that Roy Gordon Lawrence currently attends. That is evident if you look at the articles I have written on Wikipedia.   I have not posted on this page under any other identity than my own.  The above post by the author of the Roy Gordon Lawrence article (Williamo1) further proves my concerns that this article is going to be a battleground.  Hence my recommendation to remove from Wikipedia.  I have no animosity towards Williamo1... I'm just concerned that this article's intent is to disparage its subject.  Andyru 19:59, 17 February 2006 (UTC) Andyru (other comments seem to have been deleted as per history tab)


 * 'Follow- up Comment:' Many of the others who want it deleted also belong to the group. The article does not disparage the subject - He did that himself by his actions. If this article informs even one mother or father or school teacher, and enables them to protect even one child, it will be worth it. Note this, it is only a battle ground BECAUSE those who want to sit under Roy Lawrences teaching (that is their right) and allow him to be around their children during church events, do not want anyone to know about his past. Why? It just may prevent the growth of their church group. Quite right. This article is valid as it is a part of the sordid and terrble history of what happens to children in Canada. As such, if just one child is protected, it is worth it. Right? As for Lawrence, why all the tears and concern for him. What about his victims? The three he was jailed for? take out the deletes from Roy Lawrences group of protectors and supporter and this is a no brainer - keep it! &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by Williamo1 (talk &bull; contribs).