Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Saint Rose de Viterbo Catholic 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 keep. Inclement weather ahead Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 21:46, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Saint Rose de Viterbo Catholic Church

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

Unsourced substub. KATMAKROFAN (talk) 01:51, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 01:56, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 02:02, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep This article was created at 01:20; PRODded as "Unsourced" 2 minutes later; dePRODded by the creating author, who added a source at 01:35, and was then brought here (by the original PRODder) at 01:51. Tag it as {{refimprove}} and leave it to grow. New page patrollers should concentrate on the old end of the queue and not be so hasty with the PROD and AfD buttons. PamD 12:48, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep A lack of WP:BEFORE by the nominator it seems; it took a minute's search to uncover another reference. O Fortuna!^{...Imperatrix mundi.} 13:53, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 14:48, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep per above. This was brought to AfD far too quickly. Lepricavark (talk) 18:54, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep - references are not terribly in depth and independent, but there are more results under "St. Rose" & "Longview". Smmurphy^(Talk) 15:39, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Snow keep Why are hurting new users it's unfair see Wp:bite. ~ Junior5a (Talk) Cont 18:43, 3 February 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.