Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Robertson, Minister
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. AdamBiswanger1 04:00, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
John Robertson, Minister[edit]
See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert Blair, Minister above. I think that this guy should be deleted under the same critera, but I feel his is a little less clear-cut, so I've listed it seperately. -Elmer Clark 00:26, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, verifiable (and somewhat better than the other ones). JYolkowski // talk 00:58, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep and move to John Robertson (minister). T REXspeak 03:12, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, move per Dino puppy, and list at John Robertson. JDoorjam Talk 06:08, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep and move as per large carnivorous dinosaur --DeLarge 09:40, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: Might I ask which of his achievements you keep voters feel is significant enough to warrant his inclusion, especially as opposed to the other nominated ministers? -Elmer Clark 22:11, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- There is no requirement that the subject of an article be significant. This article meets our content policies very well (with three references as opposed to just one for the others). JYolkowski // talk 22:29, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Uh, excuse me? I am aware that WP:Notability is not official policy, but you say that subjects of articles don't have to be significant at all? I could create a referenced article about myself, would you favor keeping it? -Elmer Clark 23:45, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually yes, as long as those were third party reliable sources I (and the rules) would have no problem with a page about your self. AmitDeshwar 06:16, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Uh, excuse me? I am aware that WP:Notability is not official policy, but you say that subjects of articles don't have to be significant at all? I could create a referenced article about myself, would you favor keeping it? -Elmer Clark 23:45, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- There is no requirement that the subject of an article be significant. This article meets our content policies very well (with three references as opposed to just one for the others). JYolkowski // talk 22:29, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- CommentPlease note that I have started a discussion topic at Wikipedia talk:Notability (people) to create a standard for notability of religious leaders. Some should have articles, if, for instance they are an official of their denomination churchwide, or they started some important movement, wrote widely used hymns, or were notable in ways special to religion. They probably should not have an article if they were just a typical priest, rabbi, or mullah serving a local group. We have such standards for Porn actors and sports figures, and it would save a lot of argumentation. I have also started a discussion for standards of notability for individual churches, also seen all the time in AFD. We have a standard for schools, so why not for churches.Edison 20:27, 7 October 2006 (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.