Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thomas Taylor (moderator)

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. (non-admin closure) Goldsztajn (talk) 06:02, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas Taylor (moderator)[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)

I didn't find any reliable sources for Thomas Taylor. It doesn't meet with WP:GNG. And ref no. 1, 2 and 4 is bare urls. I searched 'Fasti Ecclesiastae Scoticana by Hew Scott' but didn't find anything. And ref no. 3 doesn't significant coverage. ➤ Tajwar – thesupermaN!^{【Click to Discuss】} 18:19, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. ➤ Tajwar – thesupermaN!^{【Click to Discuss】} 18:19, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:44, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Being the elected leader of a national church is a strong indication of notability. Importantly, references do not have to be online to be valid. References 1, 2 and 4 are not bare urls. They are references to a series of printed books, Fasti Ecclesiae Scoticanae, a "multi-volume dictionary which chronicles the succession of ministers in Scotland since the Protestant Reformation of 1560". This page verifies that he held the position. Receiving an honorary doctorate is a strong indication of notability. Here is another verification that suggests more information can be found at Volume IV, page 255. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 18:57, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 18:58, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment (edit conflict): Taylor is included in sources such as British History Online so the basics of his inclusion are verifiable. Perhaps the nomination is querying whether the position of Moderator of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland is inherently notable? I am not sure whether this has been queried before but I am not seeing any de-linked names at List of Moderators of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland so I don't think there is past precedent for deciding it non-notable. AllyD (talk) 19:01, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment There are no de-linked names at that list because there has been a concerted effort to create articles for each person on the basis that that position alone makes them notable. I would be interested to see if there is any discussion of that and/or criteria for such, as many of the articles are bare historical records and genealogies. Melcous (talk) 02:40, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Moderator of the General Assembly is a position equal to Prelate, Primate or Archbishop in other churches. See WP:CLERGYOUTCOMES and WP:RELIG/N.--Whiteguru (talk) 21:16, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the sources discussed above and notability norm WP:CLERGY #3 from the links provided by Whiteguru. AllyD (talk) 07:04, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per the reliable book sources mentioned above that suggest a pass of WP:GNG so that deletion is unnecessary in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 23:40, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per all of the above, and a nomination that complains about bare URLs appears to be missing that WP:DINC. Jclemens (talk) 07:26, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per all of the comment above. Article would benefit from additional references but is notable. Coldupnorth (talk) 17:42, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 01:37, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Blatantly notable. Silly nomination. The fact the nominator delsorted him under politicians and not Christianity shows a clear lack of knowledge of the subject. -- Necrothesp (talk) 22:58, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per all of the above.4meter4 (talk) 03:40, 30 September 2021 (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.