Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jubilee Christian Church 2

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 Keep. Changes made to article after most delete votes. — Ocatecir ^T 08:03, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jubilee Christian Church

Makes no assertion of notability, reads like an advert and quotes no reliable sources. I would have speedied per A7/G12 but it was the subject of a past AfD which failed mainly because of an entirely unrelated attempted mass deletion shortly before. Orderinchaos 03:04, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral (nominator vote) Changed from Delete after changes by Capmango on 13 June 2007. No longer reads like an advert and does quote sources now, question solely rests on notability now. Orderinchaos 17:32, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the Boston Globe article from the previous AFD and from the basis that this is not "pitch til you win." Edison 03:35, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep a congregation of 5,000 is pretty much a guarantee of notability. But the title should at least be changed to "Jubilee Christian Church (Boston)", there are a lot of other churches with that name, and I know of at least a couple that are just as notable. Also, text of article should be changed to not read like an advert. Capmango 08:00, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Aww, I was all set to say delete per nom, but this church is extremely well-referenced in the Boston Globe at least. Agree, needs to be rewritten. Grease Bandit 08:05, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keepp- agree with above comments and would say it is notable. Thunderwing 08:59, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's probably notable, but this doesn't look like the article that will demonstrate it. Unless the source of the notability is the various commercial enterprises mentioned in the article, I'd really like to see what makes this distinctive as a church. The hilariously miscapitalized Gospel Concert won't do it. Abstain for the moment (and I clicked through expecting to be able to vote keep). -- BPMullins | Talk 14:45, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Well-referenced??? Boston Globe: 97 words which have nothing to do with the congregation in question, but rather a passing quote about the phenomenon of gospel-sytle music in an article about gospel-style music (and not the congregation.) How is that significant as a source? Yahoo from last AfD: No longer available. No mention of who the ordaining authority of the Bishopric is, but I'd suspect it is the congregation itself. I also wonder which ones of the people mentioned in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John are present at that concert featuring the 'biggest names in Gospel'... LaughingVulcan 00:38, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Boston Globe also had a page-1 article specifically about the church (and the bookstore that it runs) on June 6 2006. Capmango 20:35, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Unless there's a criterion to the contrary, I don't think being a big church guarantees its notability (I'm sure that there are tons around); for example, there's no article for Southland Christian Church, a church double Jubilee's size that I pass occasionally in the Lexington, Kentucky area. Moreover, as was already said, the idea of being a bishop conveys authority over multiple churches, while churches with the name of "___ Christian Church" are generally either altogether nondenominational or part of the anti-hierarchical Restoration Movement — definitely not inclined to have a bishop with authority over many churches! And the references aren't relevant and sufficient enough to generate notability. If this were a long-established church, it might be notable due to its historical impact, but such a new church is unlikely to have had much historical impact — and if so, there's no indication of their existence, other than the irrelevant bit about the music. Nyttend 01:00, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would think in this case, the youngness of the church adds to its notability -- it has only been around 25 years, but is now larger than any other protestant church in Boston. Also, maybe relative size should be a factor. Does being the biggest church in a major city bring notability? Capmango 20:32, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per above. --Candy-Panda 01:36, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, since the last AfD, no sources have been added. Size doesn't determine whether or not an article should be kept, but notability does, which the article lacks. *Cremepuff 222* 01:59, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete local churches rarely get enough media attention, and WP shouldn't be used as a substitute. DGG 02:55, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

May be true in general, but this particular church has gotten a lot of media attention, not all of it positive. Capmango 21:07, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete until they can find WP:RS that they've raised the dead or something else noteworthy that distinguishes them from every other congregation. Carlossuarez46 20:54, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
NOTE TO ADMIN I have made several changes to the article. Those who voted for delete may want to take a new look and see if the new text, which no longer reads like an ad, has external sources, and asserts notability, is now acceptable. If kept, I would like to move the article to Jubilee Christian Church International (Boston) Capmango 20:32, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ultra Weak Keep I'm still not sure if this really counts on notability grounds (or organizational grounds,) but Capmango has done a yeoman's job in cleaning the article up and bringing at least some independent sources to the article. (And his/her research skills should be complimented; pulling references for "Jubilee Christian Church", even Boston, was pretty daunting earlier.) Supplementing his entry above, the closing Admin may want to look at [this diff, at AfD to 'now'] Not really convinced that it's focus is anything beyond local in scope, and not sure that it's "controversies" and other references are above any other congregation of this size, but maybe it should be given the benefit of the doubt in this case. LaughingVulcan 04:19, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Just because the church is large doesn't mean it is notable. Plus there are how many churches that don't have articles, why should this one be an exception. Xtreme racer 20:22, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletions. -- -- pb30<talk> 16:39, 14 June 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.