Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jehovah's Witnesses publications for adherents
- Jehovah's Witnesses publications for adherents (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Insufficient third-party sources. Individual publications fail notability guideline for books. See Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Jehovah's_Witnesses#JW_publications Jeffro77 (talk) 08:12, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:21, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:22, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:22, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
- Delete, Wikipedia is not an evangelical resource for any religion. Guy (Help!) 14:43, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
- Delete per WP:NOTDIR--70.80.234.196 (talk) 17:36, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
- Comment This is one of several identically worded nominations by the same person who appears to have a special interest in the Jehovah's Witnesses [1], with identically worded "Wikipedia-is-not-an-evangelical-resource" comments of agreement on each one. While I think that the title ("for adherents") should be different, and perhaps some more balance is necessary, given criticism of the Jehovah's Witnesses, it's a well-sourced article on an encyclopedic topic. Mandsford 18:35, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
- The publications that have third-party references in this article are already mentioned at Jehovah's Witnesses publications.--Jeffro77 (talk) 01:05, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
This again? A similar 2009 AfD by the same nominator was closed by an administrator with the conclusion:
"The result was redirect to Jehovah's Witnesses publications for adherents...".
Editors unfamiliar with Jehovah's Witnesses should keep in mind that JWs release at least three or four new publications every year, and nearly every title has an initial run of several million. While those titles are not necessarily notable for Wikipedia's purposes, this article doesn't seek to discuss all those titles (the majority of those titles can properly be relegated to a mere list or a general discussion). These few titles (which are each discussed in a section of this article) are significantly more notable; each of these books has is one of a handful of key publications used as manuals, tools, and references by Jehovah's Witnesses and those who study them. These publications are used globally, detailing information specific to new baptizands, fulltime pioneer ministers, and elders. These few titles are significantly more notable even than most evangelical materials with runs of several million.
Previous to the creation of this particular article, several notable publications of Jehovah's Witnesses each had an individual article. Among them:
- Organized to Do Jehovah's Will.
- Shining as Illuminators in the World.
- Pay Attention to Yourselves and to All the Flock.
Ironically, Jeffro77, the editor who here nominates this article for deletion, actually suggested this article's creation, stating, "suggest maybe a [new article] Jehovah's Witnesses organizational manuals for this book as well as Pay Attention book, as they're not really 'reference works'. Pay Attention is certainly more notable" (italics and wikilinks added).
So, "Organized to Do Jehovah's Will" (the article since 2006 about JW's global organizational manual, a notable publication) was moved to anchor the article Jehovah's Witnesses publications for adherents. Jeffro77, the above AfD nominator, himself moved "Pay Attention to Yourselves and to All the Flock" (the article since 2007 on the JW elders manual, a notable publication) to this same article. In 2009, Jeffro77 nominated for deletion the article "Shining as Illuminators in the World" (an article since 2007 about JW's full-time minister training manual, a notable publication); an administrator chose instead to redirect that article title to this article section; see May 16, 2009.
It would seem that Jeffro77 has bided his time for a year, at first merely diluting notable titles alongside others, but now relaunching his effort to delete detailed discussion of notable JW book titles, in this case a handful of books which are integral to the organization and meetings of a major religion. Doesn't it seem remarkably odd to shoot directly for deletion without giving {{Template:Refimprove}} or a similar template even a moment to work? Editors should be assured that it would be time-consuming but boringly straightforward to collect the dozens (perhaps hundreds) of additional references showing the notability of these titles. Again, odd that an AfD is the first choice of an experienced editor such as Jeffro77. Odd for an editor to try and delete an article he himself had suggested a year earlier.
Jeffro77 is himself a former Jehovah's Witnesses, having discussed his "firsthand experience" with expulsion from the religion, as well as his "close contact" and his claimed personal observations, such as how "elderly Witnesses are largely ignored". Regarding JW publications and JWs themselves, Jeffro77 has claimed that they evade taxes, inflate their statistics, abuse human rights, receive "emotional coercion", are "pharisaic", and "morally bereft". Before being rejected by an administrator, Jeffro's 2009 AfD was only seconded by one other editor, BlackCab aka LTSally, a self-described "ex-JW" editor who had previously declared himself "sickened" by the "claustrophobic, sycophantic, incestuous" Jehovah's Witnesses.
Editors and administrators who are less directly affected by Jehovah's Witnesses should reject the efforts of
a former JW (such as Jeffro77) to delete this article, as administrators have rejected similar AfD's in the past for titles such as "Shining as Illuminators in the World". and "Aid to Bible Understanding". The fact is that Wikipedia is well-served by a detailed discussion of a handful of individually-notable but related publications. This discussion in this article should be in addition to a mere list or general discussion of the hundreds of other JW titles of lesser notability.
--AuthorityTam (talk) 19:51, 17 June 2010 (UTC)