Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rosebery Park Baptist Church

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. joe decker ^talk 15:21, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Rosebery Park Baptist Church

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

Fails WP:NONPROFIT. No evidence this church meets notability guidelines. APK whisper in my ear 11:46, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. APK whisper in my ear 11:46, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. APK whisper in my ear 11:47, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I did find some passing book mentions, but only passing mention, and that's pretty much it. If it is notable, it may be in print sources that aren't easily accessible, since the church is almost 130 years old. Unfortunately for the author, in situations like that, the onus is largely on the author to know enough about the subject to be able to find those sources and demonstrate notability. TimothyJosephWood 18:58, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 14:21, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 14:21, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Delete - I wouldn't be surprised if such a historic church didn't have some good sources, but I don't find them in a quick search. If someone else can point some out, I'd change my vote. Also, the main editor of the page, User:REVSAB, has a very similar user name to the name of the current pastor, Reverend Seidel Abel Boanerges.Smmurphy^(Talk) 14:36, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Anarchyte (work | talk) 13:16, 20 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Like others my searches found nothing helpful to notability. Nothing in the article or sources hint at likely significant coverage. I admit to not seeing or reading the 68 page book referenced in the article. I assume it is not an independent reliable source. Gab4gab (talk) 16:37, 20 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete My Google search only points to pages regarding events at the church, pages about the church on social media and media publishing websites, books about churches mentioning the church in passing, and pages about the church on travel sites. Nothing that points to notability. TouhouFan9801 (talk) 20:54, 20 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I cannot find WP:RSes.E.M.Gregory (talk) 00:06, 22 January 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.