Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/George Vakayil

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 redirect to List of Servants of God. Randykitty (talk) 18:52, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

George Vakayil[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)

The only independent source that I can find for this priest is the one from The New Indian Express cited in the article saying that he has been declared a servant of God, the first of four steps towards canonization. If he is eventually declared a saint then he will almost certainly be notable per WP:ANYBIO, but without any further sources being a servant of God is not enough. Phil Bridger (talk) 16:51, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Phil Bridger (talk) 17:05, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Phil Bridger (talk) 17:07, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect, if the problems with targeting can be resolved; else, delete. In principle, the rational redirect target would be List of Servants of God. But that's a markedly incomplete list whose inclusion criteria are not immediately forthcoming. Complicating the issue, there's an apparent content fork at Candidates for sainthood. I'm neither willing nor, frankly, competent in the topic area to try to clean this up. And I think there's at least an outside question about whether such a list is tenable in the first place (if the latter of the two lists represents the rate that people would be added, a full historical accounting would be, erm, long). If that's all fixable, then a redirect here is the obvious choice. Otherwise... Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 21:56, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Declared a Servant of God, so on his way to canonisation. I think he meets the notability threshold. -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:11, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing automatic about someone being declared a servant of God later being canonised, so the subject cannot be said to be "on his way to canonisation". This is a necessary, but far from sufficient, step on that path. Phil Bridger (talk) 16:20, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As I said, he's on his way to canonisation... -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:56, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Only in the sense that when I graduated from university I was on my way to a Nobel Prize. Phil Bridger (talk) 16:16, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hardly. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:12, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect (to List of Servants of God). Redirect for the reasons stated by Nom - insufficient at this point - there are large numbers of SoG and being one doesn't make one notable. Additionally, since many of them don't make it to sainthood, deciding that reaching this level is equivalent because they will be saints is no more than WP:CRYSTAL. As to the redirect target, there appears to at least be some difference, but there are certainly contentfork issues and confusion. For the moment, one is so clear-cut that it makes logical sense. Nosebagbear (talk) 12:38, 17 January 2019 (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.