Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Calvary Baptist Church (Manhattan, New York)

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. Jayjg ^(talk) 03:48, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Calvary Baptist Church (Manhattan, New York)[edit]

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

contested prod. Not clear how this church is notable, other than pastor has a famous sister, References appear to be primary sources. RadioFan (talk) 01:23, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~ (Changed to Keep, see below). Appears to be no more notable than thousands of other churches. --MelanieN (talk) 03:31, 16 November 2009 (UTC)MelanieN[reply]

Keep (Note: I admit that I sincerely dislike the philosophy espoused by several of the better-known ministers of this congregation, but WP:N is still WP:N). This church received significant and independent coverage in "Frank Leslie's Sunday magazine, Volume 13" in 1883 [1]. An early pastor. A.D. Gilette, was later the chaplain of those executed for the assassination of Abraham Lincoln [2]. John D. Rockefeller attended the church and JDR Jr taught Bible class in 1914, while they and the church were under assault by anarchists [3], [4]. The "Lutheran Witness" of 1917, quotes from an interview in the St. Louis Post Dispatch, surely a reliable source and obviously independent of the Baptist denomination, heartily endorsed the criticism of then Pastor Kemp of Calvary Baptist against "social dancing," wherein a "degenerate" man puts his right arm around a woman's waist and holds her right hand with his left, while they execute the "two step," a "deadly danger" to the morality of society. Calvary was the pulpit from which a very noted fundamentalist minister, John Roach Straton preached and had national influence for many years. He fearlessly walked through the redlight district and shocked the Sunday morning flock with reports of what he had observed. See [5]"Satan in the Dance Hall: Rev. John Roach Straton, Social Dancing, and Morality in 1920s New York City (2008). Page 34 says that in 1923 Time (magazine) reported on the "notorious squabble" among the church's board of trustees as they tried to tone down Straton's fundamentalist and moralist stridency, such as railing against "social dancing." He and the church were covered in Time magazine again in 1928 [6]. The church was the base for his campaign against dancing, covered on the front page of the New York Times. After the death of William Jennings Bryan, Straton was "popularly anointed leader of the fundamentalist cause.[7]" He was called "The Fundamentalist Pontiff." The book Elmer Gantry included material gleaned by Sinclair Lewis at Calvary (per p 38 of "Satan in the dance hall.")See also [8], [9]. Lewis also based evangelist "Mike Monday" in Babbit partly on Straton per [10]. Calvary is covered throughout the "Satan in the dance hall" book. Calvary is covered by Time in 1927 [11]. The church was an early example of a downtown big city church in a highrise. It is covered in Religion and public life in the Middle Atlantic region: the fount of diversity page 13, among "important religious structures". Straton's predecessor at Calvary, Dr. Robert MacArthur, was also a highly influential minister and his pastorate there had significant coverage in 1909 as did the church history up to his time. The church's 50th anniversary in 1897 under MacArthur's pastorate had extensive coverage in the New York Times [12]. The older and newer Calvary Baptist buildings were covered as one of 83 NY City sites in "New York Then and Now" page 165-166. Calvary was "one of the earliest religious broadcasters in the New York area" per The airwaves of New York page 168, which is additional significant coverage in a reliable and independent source. Disagreements between the followers of MacArthur and Straton and Stratons efforts gained frequent NY Times coverage [13]. A successor of Straton was Stephen F. Olford, another highly influential minister, who was the mentor of Billy Graham and a pioneer religious TV broadcaster.Another nationally known minister at Calvary was William Ward Ayer, whose radio broadcast "Marching Truth" reached a half million listeners nationwide, and was known for his anti-Communist and anti-Catholic rhetoric. Ayer was, per a poll, NYC's third most influential citizen [14]. WP:N appears to be satisfied by this quick perusal of Google Books. In 1953, Time magazine said Calvary had "the oldest continuing religious broadcast on the air" with listeners in 6 states and internationally via shortwave. Google News archive shows additional significant coverage in numerous reliable and independent sources [15] such as additional Time magazine articles [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21] and New York Times articles [22], [23], [24] which appear to go beyond routine listings of activities or reprints of press releases. In the failed notability guideline Wikipedia:Notability (local churches and other religious congregations), which represents the views of a number of Wikipedia editors, this congregation and building would , besides the general notability guideline,[25], satisfy "The congregation plays a notable or significant role within its denomination or religion," "The congregation has, or has had, notable leaders or clergy, for whom the particular church has had a formative impact," "The congregation's teachings or theology is considered unique or notably controversial," and "The congregation building has particular architectural and/or historic significance." Do you need more reliable sources with significant coverage? They are available:[26], [27], [28], [29], [30], [31], [32], [33], [34], [35], [36]. Notability is not temporary, so if a church was ever notable, it is sufficient. Edison (talk) 03:52, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Edison, a suggestion: instead of adding all this interesting and carefully sourced information to an AfD discussion, add it to the article! That's where the significance of this church needs to be explained and documented. If all this information was in the article, it would be a far more significant and encyclopedic article - and I for one would change my vote to "keep". --MelanieN (talk) 16:15, 17 November 2009 (UTC)MelanieN[reply]

An AFD is a good place to decide whether a subject is notable. It is far harder for me to rewrite an article than to find reliable sources with independent and significant coverage, although that is apparently a skill many AFD nominators lack. The AFD will always be linked from the discussion page, so someone who is a talented writer and who feels neutrally toward the subject can use the identified sources to expand the reference and provide inline cites. I dislike the right-wing fundamentalist heritage of this church too much to want to spend the time to do a good NPOV article. I am also not that confident in my skill in writing articles. I would be happy to add the online-available refs at the bottom of the page for someone to use in improving the article, without rewriting it and providing inline cites, and the possible need to fight edit wars against those who might think the history adds undue weight to a chapter some might wish to forget, as opposed to fluffy PR release-based articles covering bake sales, recitals, and rallies. Edison (talk) 19:01, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I don't feel like rewriting the article either, but I will change my vote to "keep" based on your research. However I wish some of this historical significance was reflected in the article. --MelanieN (talk) 15:43, 18 November 2009 (UTC)MelanieN[reply]

The article should show a balance between current information (which could come from its own website, newsletters, and other non-independent sources) and some of the history, which appears to have the reliable and independent sourcing, though perhaps not all the positive spin an organization might desire. Edison (talk) 16:41, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have copied over the best of the references I found to the talk page of the article, and included sufficient detail for each to be used as a footnote in the article. More coverage of recent, less newsworthy activities should be included for a balanced article. Some of the refs and information should be added to the Straton article, which is a bit unbalanced in the positive direction at present. I have added some of the references to the article and included mention of its claims to notability as an early urban highrise church/hotel, an early and influential religious broadcaster, and a national center of fundamentalism and Biblical moralism and anti-modernism in the 1920's. Edison (talk) 18:51, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good job! I vote Keep based on newly provided evidence of notability. --MelanieN (talk) 03:08, 21 November 2009 (UTC)MelanieN[reply]

Keep Racepacket (talk) 10:21, 23 November 2009 (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.