Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Missiology

This discussion was subject to a deletion review on 2010 August 14.
For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review.

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 IAR keep Missiology is a well-established term. If this search isn't convincing enough, a Wikipedia article search for "missiology" (excluding this article, of course) shows any number of other reliably sourced uses. Nothing about this close prevents the appropriate improvement of this article. Jclemens (talk) 17:43, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Missiology[edit]

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

Citation Zach Beauvais (talk) 09:37, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Evangelism. Heck, I'm a preacher's kid and all, but this article doesn't belong on Wikipedia. Missiology is simply a neologism, an attempt to redefine evangelism and essentially "bring it up-to-date" in the eyes of the unchurched or attract believers who heard the terms "missionary" or "missions" and immediately related that to falling asleep in church. It is also a somewhat thinly veiled, if not blatant attempt to promote the organization of Missiology.org as noted in the reference and links. I would suggest to redirect to Evangelism. Cindamuse (talk) 10:08, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as pure promotion for Missiology.org. Prsaucer1958 (talk) 12:51, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - reads like a brochure. Of the three refs provided, one is back to its own site, the other accessible one is a dictionary definition in an online dictionary. More WP:RS within the meaning of Wikipedia pôlicy are required before this organisation can be demonstrated to be mature enough for its own entry in this encylopedia.--Kudpung (talk) 15:47, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete under the premise that Wikipedia is not a dictionary and that this word is a neologism. Carrite (talk) 16:27, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:03, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep -- This is not a neologism, but is a specialised discpline, which I thought was proimarily concerned with the study of Christian Missions, particularly in the same sense as "missionary". It differs from evangelism which is much more about preaching the gospel than deciding where (and perhaps how) to preach it. One might describe it as the academic discipline of the study of Christian Missions. I do not think that the article is about an organisation at all. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:17, 14 August 2010 (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.

Delete - for exactly the same reasons listed above. I don't understand how a single vote to three deletes and a redirect means that the flag is removed? I think it should be deleted, or, if it is not, that the citations (which have been noted for clean-up since 2007(!) should be completely revamped. The article reads like a brochure for a practice, the citations are inadequate, and several editors believe it should be kept as a candidate for deletion. Zach Beauvais (talk) 22:32, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]