Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Love & Respect

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. Per overhaul of article - demonstrating GNG 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 16:12, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Love & Respect[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)

This is one of the worst sourced articles I have ever seen. If you strip out primary sources (YouTube, Focus On The Family), blogs and other cruft, all that's left is the title.

A Google search shows many sales pages but no substantive coverage, no reviews in mainstream sources or anything like that, just homeschooler blogs and ministries.

The obsessive use of the title Dr. when referring to the author leaves a distinct smell of promotion. Guy (help!) 18:01, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:15, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:15, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sourced -- I started this article in good faith in Aug 2009 it looks like and I don't claim to be an expert in reference material, but I quickly clicked on 7 different articles for other Christian books in this category and this particular article has 28 references, none of the other 7 I looked at were close, if you desire to delete this article based mainly on your personal opinion being the 'Worst Sourced' than you might as well start looking at allllll the other books in this category.

But when I get some time I will go back and look at this and see if I can improve the quality of some of the reference sources for youuuuuu! I believe a request to have the reference sources looked at rather than the article up for deletion would have been a better use of your time and input. Tinkermen (talk) 03:54, 26 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have edited the previous comment so that it did not appear as a separate section; something that I am sure was not intended. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:35, 26 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment -- O know nothing of this book but the fact that it has been translated into 7 other languages surely indicates notability. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:35, 26 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This was a widely discussed book, but it was also a ministry that ran marriage conferences nationwide. Because I immediately found a number of articles giving significant coverage of the book in the year it was published (2004), I suspect that the person who nominated this page for deletion did not look at back issues of newspapers. I only found one formal book review (The Gazette (Colorado Springs), but the conferences/ministry began in 1999, the book came out in 2004, and the conferences continued for years afterwards. Perhaps the article should be about the "Love & Respect" ministry, of which the book seems to have been part. On the other hand I found articles stating that it was a bestseller. and I can see that he has since written many books on the same and similar themes, so I suppose that they do sell. I have taken the liberty of removing the YouTube clip, blogs and other unreliable sources described by the editor nominating this page for deletion. I have also added reliable sources that give significant coverage to the Eggerichs and their ministry, by no means are all of these are flattering.IceFishing (talk) 15:08, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 18:58, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have deleted all of the questionable sources (actually, I think I deleted all sources already on the page when I began,) and added significant coverage in well-known daily newspapers including the Albuquerque Journal and The Tennessean. News coverage began in 2004 and continues.IceFishing (talk) 18:45, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per WP:HEY as the article has been significantly improved with the replacement of unreliable sources with multiple reliable sources such as reliable newspaper coverage so that WP:GNG is passed, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 19:32, 31 January 2020 (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.