Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alliance of Renewal Churches

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 delete. Vanamonde (Talk) 18:22, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alliance of Renewal Churches[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. See also WP:NORG. Google News Archive search shows only passing mentions. Google Books search reveals only two pages of discussion in one book, and a description in a self-published source here. Daask (talk) 17:28, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Daask (talk) 17:28, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. Daask (talk) 17:28, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Daask (talk) 17:28, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is covered in reasonable depth in this pan-Lutheran overview type book: [1]; another such book is Brug's WELS and Other Lutherans, which is probably the most comprehensive of such works and attempts to be scholarly with footnotes. Along with the "Apostles Today" coverage, that is substantial coverage in three reliable, third party sources, meaning this denomination meets GNG. Additionally, this is the only charismatic Lutheran denomination ever in history that identifies as Lutheran--excepting the by some measures certain Laedstanti in Scandinavia which are charismatic not from the larger movement but due to indigenous influences and also maybe excepting the Christ's Household of Faith commune in St. Paul although they may not identify as such. This Lutheran charismatic factor makes it more interesting to write about. American Lutheranism has a side-history of charismatics within the larger denominations during the 20th century, but most of that has died down (or in some cases, pastors get kicked out and form non-Lutheran congregations with their supporters). The ARC is to-date a continuation of this history and curious because it stayed Lutheran.

Some years back I edited a template for American Lutheran denominations and vetted them myself to see if they were legit--this one passed the "test" so to speak because it is in fact a real denomination with congregations and ministers. At the time nearly all congregations were co-rostered with the ELCA, a much larger denomination. Yet since then the ELCA has cracked down on co-rostering and I would not be surprised if more of the ARC congregations are either only Alliance of Renewal Churches rostered or co-rostered with another more flexible denomination such as LCMC.

The denominations which failed my vetting were possibly defunct or were shells to enable sort of a fantasy world where ordinations are purchased and clergy have meetups without regular physical congregations. I think they have been deleted already.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 04:24, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as has significant coverage in multiple reliable sources identified above so the subject passes WP:GNG in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 18:26, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

But where are those "multiple" and "reliable" ones? This does not help. -The Gnome (talk) 08:47, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:13, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, PhantomSteve/talk¦contribs\ 17:59, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete we cannot keep an article that is only sourced to a subject's website. Nor can we keep an article that uses so much jargon.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:07, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Additional references have been identified in this discussion and jargon can be removed as per WP: so fix it, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 20:45, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete since subject is evidently not notable. Even with the article being nominated for deletion, efforts to keep it have not been able to identify leverage on which to claim notability. Wikipedia is not a directory of religions nor a compendium of random information. -The Gnome (talk) 08:47, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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.