Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Greater Church of Lucifer

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. SpinningSpark 15:01, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Greater Church of Lucifer

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

A very new (founded 2013), minor religious group. Lack of extensive coverage in reliable sources. There is a small quantity of media coverage, but it seems to be mainly about local events. Some hits on Google books, but they appear to all be self-published works. SJK (talk) 10:00, 23 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. SJK (talk) 10:01, 23 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I see not just local, but nationwide coverage (in the 'news' link) of their Texas opening in 2015, as well as nationwide coverage from early 2017 of one of their leaders converting to Christianity... Jclemens (talk) 20:26, 23 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
So this Satanist group have received coverage on two occasions – (1) they opened a Satanic church in Texas, Christians protested, there was lots of local coverage but a bit of national coverage too; (2) their founder converted to Christianity, and a Christian ministry he is associated with has been pushing a lot of media about that. Now, is (2) primarily coverage about this Satanist group, or is it primarily coverage about him personally? I think, the fact that he converted from this particular Satanist group, as opposed to some other, isn't very important to (2)–it is primarily a story about him personally, or about Satanists converting to Christianity generally, not about this particular group. And (1) is basically a single event, and while you are right it got some national coverage, but still it was primarily a local story to which the national media briefly paid attention. Is covering this single event enough to meet WP:ORGDEPTH–maybe that coverage would be better justification for an article on the event itself (e.g. "2015 Old Town Spring anti-Satanism protests"?) SJK (talk) 21:30, 23 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not one to add 'weak' or 'strong' qualifiers to my !votes, but I grant that the case for keeping the movement is based in part on the uncited assertions of other child denominations springing up elsewhere. Otherwise, yes, your characterization of the topic matches my understanding. Jclemens (talk) 01:14, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. Jclemens (talk) 20:27, 23 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Paganism-related deletion discussions. Jclemens (talk) 20:28, 23 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:04, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:55, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:32, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This is a trivial group; it appears to be a single congregation [engaged in puffery] that has shut down. Power~enwiki (talk) 01:57, 8 May 2017 (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.