Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ecclesia Gnostica: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
** Possibly a large seam of articles without at least 2 cites from sources that meet [[WP:RS]] has been stumbled onto by editors who like deleting things, and so they’ve gone off on a bit of a spree? That seems to be the way it usually works. The solution, as ever, is to add sources. If you feel sources can be found but need help doing so you could always apply the rescue tag to those articles. [[User:Artw|Artw]] ([[User talk:Artw|talk]]) 21:22, 23 March 2009 (UTC) |
** Possibly a large seam of articles without at least 2 cites from sources that meet [[WP:RS]] has been stumbled onto by editors who like deleting things, and so they’ve gone off on a bit of a spree? That seems to be the way it usually works. The solution, as ever, is to add sources. If you feel sources can be found but need help doing so you could always apply the rescue tag to those articles. [[User:Artw|Artw]] ([[User talk:Artw|talk]]) 21:22, 23 March 2009 (UTC) |
||
*** BTW I'm not seeing anything else gnostic related up at AfD at a quick glance - what other articles are you referring to? [[User:Artw|Artw]] ([[User talk:Artw|talk]]) 21:30, 23 March 2009 (UTC) |
*** BTW I'm not seeing anything else gnostic related up at AfD at a quick glance - what other articles are you referring to? [[User:Artw|Artw]] ([[User talk:Artw|talk]]) 21:30, 23 March 2009 (UTC) |
||
****[[Gnosticism_in_modern_times]] Apostolic Johannite Church just got deleted yesterday. [[Alexandrian Gnostic Church]] was up, but changed to a cleanup tag. [[User:Father.rassbach|Father.rassbach]] ([[User talk:Father.rassbach|talk]]) 21:34, 23 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 21:34, 23 March 2009
- Ecclesia Gnostica (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Incomplete nomination by 69.143.229.149 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) who states on the article's talk page: Paucity or non-existence of third party sources, despite international scope there are too few members. meco (talk) 16:20, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. meco (talk) 16:20, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. meco (talk) 16:20, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
- Comment - I would like to see some better sources. Anyone? Bearian (talk) 19:00, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
- How many members does this organization need to fulfill meco's personal criteria? Given numerous published works by the head of the organization, its 50+ year history and its immediate membership of a thousand people, how is this not noteworthy? Why are all the articles on contemporary Gnosticism being systematically deleted? What if all the articles on, say, Rastafarianism were flagged for deletion over a 48 hour period? What the hell is going on? - Jordan Stratford —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.69.155.157 (talk) 19:36, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
- Possibly a large seam of articles without at least 2 cites from sources that meet WP:RS has been stumbled onto by editors who like deleting things, and so they’ve gone off on a bit of a spree? That seems to be the way it usually works. The solution, as ever, is to add sources. If you feel sources can be found but need help doing so you could always apply the rescue tag to those articles. Artw (talk) 21:22, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
- BTW I'm not seeing anything else gnostic related up at AfD at a quick glance - what other articles are you referring to? Artw (talk) 21:30, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
- Gnosticism_in_modern_times Apostolic Johannite Church just got deleted yesterday. Alexandrian Gnostic Church was up, but changed to a cleanup tag. Father.rassbach (talk) 21:34, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
- BTW I'm not seeing anything else gnostic related up at AfD at a quick glance - what other articles are you referring to? Artw (talk) 21:30, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
- Possibly a large seam of articles without at least 2 cites from sources that meet WP:RS has been stumbled onto by editors who like deleting things, and so they’ve gone off on a bit of a spree? That seems to be the way it usually works. The solution, as ever, is to add sources. If you feel sources can be found but need help doing so you could always apply the rescue tag to those articles. Artw (talk) 21:22, 23 March 2009 (UTC)