Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sollentuna Kontrakt

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 redirect to Diocese of Stockholm (Church of Sweden). — Coffee // have a cup // essay // 05:02, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sollentuna Kontrakt[edit]

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

Unsourced affair without sources or proof of notability. Fails WP:GNG. The Banner _talk 00:12, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 00:18, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 00:18, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. It's a group of parishes. Dioceses are generally held to be notable, but sub-divisions of dioceses are not. -- Necrothesp (talk) 00:21, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- WP:ILIKE, WP:Vote. Cite a policy that warrants deletion. ChemTerm (talk) 00:27, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - As I stated in the nomination: it fails WP:GNG The Banner _talk 00:44, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - You seem to misunderstand the AfD procedure. We state our opinions here. Opinions do not have to be backed up by policies. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:03, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - "AfDs are a place for rational discussion of whether an article is able to meet Wikipedia's article guidelines and policies." ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 20:03, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      - Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy! Ignore all rules! Use common sense! It is indeed a discussion as to whether it meets notability guidelines. However, those guidelines are not set in stone and are therefore open to discussion and opinion. A policy or guideline does not have to be quoted for an opinion to be valid. This is a common misconception of those who misunderstand the process. -- Necrothesp (talk) 22:42, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        But that is the problem: you don't Ignore all rules! ChemTerm (talk) 21:37, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Diocese of Stockholm (Church of Sweden), where much the same content appears. This is part of the State Church, not some minor denomination, but I do not think that in UK we have articles on individual rural deaneries, which seem to be similar. Peterkingiron (talk) 11:46, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect per Peterkingiron. Unlike the parishes (socknar of course, not församlingar), these are purely ecclesiastical divisions of little broader significance. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 20:07, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and redirect. Minor ecclesiastical subdivion of Swedish state church lacks any inherent notability, and there is no evidence of substantial coverage in multiple reliable sources. Any significant material is already on the article on the diocese. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 22:00, 23 October 2012 (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.