Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Church of the organized
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. - Mailer Diablo 10:29, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Church of the organized[edit]
- Church of the organized (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
Been tagged for notability for several months now. It's apparent that the notability will not be asserted. If the group is notable, this page should still be deleted so that a proper article can be started. Sources are entirely self-referential. The asserted "source" of the Church of the Subgenius website makes no mention of anything in this article. To summarize WP:N and WP:ATT are simply not met. i kan reed 01:05, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Ghits 12 that are not duplicate. fails WP:N Signed Jeepday 02:01, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. MSJapan 03:53, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong Delete as failing WP:ATT, WP:ORG, WP:NN, WP:BULLSHIT, and, oh, add WP:COI as well; check the ID of the creator. Ravenswing 16:03, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. -- Alucard (Dr.) | Talk 20:30, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. This is stunningly lacking in notability. -FisherQueen (Talk) 20:49, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, per 12 ghits, etc. GoodnightmushTalk 21:30, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete It is explained clearly that this is a made-up church. And then it is explained that the joke is known only in a small area. Well known jokes of this sort belong in WP, and this is totally unknown. By getting in here even temporarily it has perhaps achieved its object of getting better known. There are 21,000 ghits, of which almost all are mirrors and internet archive searches on words from the original articles. DGG 00:02, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per Ravenswing. GreenJoe 21:18, 15 April 2007 (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.