Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Supporters of Sun Myung Moon

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 delete. I think the compelling argument is that inclusion is rather subjective with no clear inclusion definition. I mean how do we define how klnow for being supportors iof Rev Moon? Unless that's documented in the sourcing then inclusion is always going to eb subjective. Spartaz ^Humbug! 15:31, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Supporters of Sun Myung Moon[edit]

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

This is WP:Original research. There is no source for listing people based on their support for another person. Would WP have an article on the supporters of President Obama, much less a fairly minor person such as Mr. Moon? Northwestgnome (talk) 06:49, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 13:47, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The page has some good citing, though it definitely could use improvement of sources in a few places. There seem to be other "Supporters of" lists, for example List of supporters of same-sex marriage in the United States. Cirt (talk) 15:41, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As the starter of the article I think this is an important topic. I have only listed people if their support is substantial and well documented. And yes the president does have lists of supporters, mainly those who endorsed him in the campaign. I do hope that all Americans support him, although maybe not on every issue.Borock (talk) 19:20, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As the nominator said this is WP:OR. I am a member of the Unification Church and am aware that Rev. Moon has been very active in many areas of public life over the last 60 years. As such he has worked together directly or indirectly with, literally, millions of people. To single out a few and say they are "supporters", besides original research, also runs into potenial problems with WP:BLP. If WP had a policy against conspiracy theories it would run into problems there too. Also who says they are supporters of him and not he of them?Steve Dufour (talk) 19:28, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Not the greatest article (and it should be renamed to "List of..." since that's what it is), however these people's support of Moon is well documented and this seems to be a notable issue that is brought up by the news media. Kitfoxxe (talk) 16:43, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There are two acceptable bases for such a list: those who are known primarily or in large part for their support , or, alternatively, those people with Wikipedia articles to show their notability for whatever, who are supporters. At present it seems to be the less defensible Prominent Figures in public life who have been well-known as supporters.... DGG ( talk ) 05:43, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete- Most times I am in favor of Lists. I usually find them informative and typically they peek my curiosity to investigate further either the subject of the list or a person/place or thing on the list. However, in this case, there are no parameters that give guidance of who is included on the list. An example would be what constitutes support. Giving money to the cause or person and if so how much money makes it a support to all the ideologies of the cause or person the money was given to and does this mean actual support. An example from the article itself gives Neil Bush as a supporter of Rev Moon based on this article [1]. However, the list fails to mention Joe Lieberman or former President George Bush, that are mentioned right after Neil Bush, in the article used as a reference. And does saying a few nice words about the individual or cause mean that the individual saying these words really supports the individual or the cause. Remeber, sometimes we say nice things, with our fingers crossed behind our backs, is this tantamount to being considered as support or actually just Diplomacy . Personally I believe this list would be subject to POV inclusions that would vary wildly from individual to individual who is placing a name on the list. As such, the list would not conform to our current policy of NOPV and would subject the list to constant edit warring which would serve no purpose other than opening Wikipedia to chraagers of libel. Happy New Year. JAAG^Talk 16:09, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So far all the living people on the list are ones who have been very public in their support of Moon, and have been reported as such in the mainstream news media. So I don't think they are going to sue WP for libel. Kitfoxxe (talk) 15:11, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But it's still kind of a random list. Out of the thousands of people who could be listed only a handful have. Steve Dufour (talk) 16:54, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as not a useful list. So these five people support this religious figure? Who cares? And if their support is in any way relevant to anything, why does it not to suffice to say so in their articles or in the article about who they support? Sandstein 21:02, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Except that WP is not censored. Reliable sources (in some cases major newspapers) have seen fit to mention these people's support of Moon. They seemed to think it was important. Borock (talk) 14:38, 7 January 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.