Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christ Symbolic Union

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. Randykitty (talk) 13:42, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Christ Symbolic Union[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)

There are notability concerns but this is also a case of WP:BLOWITUP. I had tagged this as blatant spam but Iridescent found that "it looks like a genuine attempt to write what the group does, by someone unfamiliar with Wikipedia's conventions". Fair enough but the tone is so proselytic that I don't think this can be edited into something that meets WP:NPOV without basically starting over from scratch. This is most obvious in the "Objectives" section but there are problems throughout. Even calling the founder an "Apostle" (a messenger of God) is dubious if we truly want a neutral tone. Furthermore, it's not entirely clear that the organisation itself is that notable. Of the references provided, most are not third-party, one is an interview and the last three are about a controversy created by a book authored by the CSU founder but only mention CSU in passing. Depending on one's definition of "significant coverage", CSU does not quite meet the requirements of WP:GNG. Pichpich (talk) 21:08, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kirbanzo (talk) 21:36, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:44, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:44, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ghana-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:44, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty (talk) 14:21, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Delete - I think Pichpich has covered it well. This seems like it fails WP:GNG. At the very least, this article needs to be totally nuked and rewritten from a less promotional POV. Skirts89 (talk) 23:10, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, on the basis of WP:TNT, without prejudice in recreating. Ifnord (talk) 00:48, 18 December 2018 (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.