Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Wagner (pastor)

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. clpo13(talk) 20:27, 23 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

John Wagner (pastor)[edit]

John Wagner (pastor) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Written as an advertisement (by "John1427" who has only written and edited articles relating to John Wagner (likely himself)). Single source with questionable reputability. Doesn't seem to fit notability guidelines. Noahhoward (talk) 17:54, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 18:20, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. XOR'easter (talk) 18:27, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dear Noah Howard, I just wanted to let you know that John is a very common name. I am not John Wagner himself, my real identity is someone else who uses a bible verse as a tag. Please show other evidence that it is actually the pastor writing about himself. I am actually going to change my username due to your accusation. It feels terrible to be accused of self-vanity. John Wagner is a pastor of the 38th largest megachurch in the country. He has hosted Creflo Dollar and hosts a congregation of ten thousand weekly in New Jersey. The source will be changed in order to fit guidelines. Yours sincerely John1427 (talk) 18:12, 16 January 2019 (UTC) [reply]
@John1427: My apologies regarding my erroneous assumption. As for John Wagner's notability, being within the top 40 largest megachurches in the US is not the test Wikipedia uses to determine notability. I will happily concede Wagner's notability and vote to keep the article if you can supply me with more than one reputable source with no clear connection to the subject (newspaper article, book, etc) with significant coverage on Wagner, and update the article (per BLP policy) to only include referenced information. Noahhoward (talk) 18:55, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - I can't find any reliable, independent, and in-depth sources to demonstrate notability of the subject. Fails WP:GNG. Jmertel23 (talk) 18:59, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Dear Noah Howard and Jmertel23, Its great Noah you were helping. I understand now Wikipedia standards on notability. I will give you more than one source. His cocaine addiction is referenced here.[1]
Yours sincerely John1427 (talk) 18:12, 16 January 2019 (UTC) [reply]

References

  • Currently in the process of resolving WP:NOSHARE and WP:ORGNAME WP:APPARENTCOI. My username is a Bible quote from Jn 14:27 NIV that says "Peace I leave with you; my peace I give you. I do not give to you as the world gives. Do not let your hearts be troubled and do not be afraid." John1427 (talk) 20:38, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 21:16, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above. I checked the sources in the article and they are church happenings that John Wagner is at or sponsoring. I also checked Google, NYT, Google books, nothing. Fails WP:GNG Aurornisxui (talk) 01:07, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete There is not enough coverage from reliable, secondary sources to establish WP:GNG the Sun Sentinel story is the only such coverage that I could find in my search. Best, GPL93 (talk) 17:05, 17 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's a Deeper Issue.
Georgia Pastor Jentezen Franklin + 10,000 person congregation = passes WP:GNG? NJ Pastor John Wagner + 10,000 member congregation = fails WP:GNG? I criticize Wikipedia for its sense to invite pornographic actors on WP:PEOPLE instead of men who serve and follow the LORD our GOD. Resolve as you wish. John1427 (talk) 23:52, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's about notability. The subject of this article has not received enough reliable media or academic coverage to garner it. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a place for religious morality. If you cannot accept that or abide by the Wikipedia's standards or understand that perspective then I highly recommend you find another outlet. This is not a place to evangelize or project what you perceive to be moral. Please see WP:NOBLECAUSE. Best, GPL93 (talk) 00:22, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@John1427: If your goal is to have Mr. Wagner included on Wikipedia and the notability guidelines are as lax as you report they are for pornstars, I'd tell John he's in the wrong industry. Noahhoward (talk) 00:29, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@John1427: @Noahhoward: after looking at his page, not entirely sure that the sources for Jentezen Franklin's page are enough to establish GNG either. Best, GPL93 (talk) 00:33, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:Notability. The 2003 Sun Sentinel stories mentioning the pastor ([1], [2], [3]) are about incidents that seem to have gained notability because of their controversial nature (the pastor getting divorced, resigning from his church, starting a new one, etc.), not because the pastor was notable himself. Zenadix (talk) 08:22, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and probably also Block John1427 per WP:NOTHERE (repeatedly changing Jesus in a manner that does not inspire confidence). Jeppiz (talk) 19:39, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Jeppiz: It would appear that he hasn't heeded to warnings about making unconstructive edits to Jesus and it he does not care for Wikipedia's policies so I think it may be appropriate to Block John1427 as well. Best, GPL93 (talk) 21:07, 21 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.