Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Church of God of North Carolina

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, consensus is that there is not significant coverage in reliable sources to meet the relevant notability guideline. Davewild (talk) 19:53, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Church of God of North Carolina[edit]

Fails to meet WP:ORG criteria. The article has been unreferenced for over a year and a Google search doesn't show any RS. The article contains information such as "According to church sources..." and "It is believed by this group...". AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 07:10, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep. It is true that the article remained unreferenced for too long a time, and it is also doubtful whether the organisation meets the criteria set forth in WP:ORG. However, the cited "declaration of independence" of the church is somewhat original and notable. Therefore, I would tend to keep the article on the church. Deletion, however, may also be in line with Wikipedia policies. --Abrech (talk) 08:30, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Having been involved in churches until I was 21, I've seen many of them "split" because of theological differences or even petty arguments. Unless there's a RS stating why this split (aka declaration of independence) is notable, I don't see a reason why the article should stay. AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 09:19, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, I doubt there will be neutral sources available and as nom. says - fails WP:ORG. +Hexagon1 ^(t) 10:05, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I am fairly unqualified to give an opinion on the notability of a church, but I would bring to your attention the fact that there is a book about this church [1]. I am not aware of the author's connection to the organization. Kinston eagle (talk) 17:22, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A brief google search shows he is an eastern Baptist theologian, so I am unsure as to the neutrality in the book. I still think overall the topic isn't notable enough anyway, and I still doubt sufficient sources will become available. +Hexagon1 ^(t) 03:29, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp (talk) 15:46, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of North Carolina-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp (talk) 15:46, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delete Does not meet notability requirements per WP:N and WP:ORG. No independent sources available to establish notability, much less to verify article's content. Dgf32 (talk) 16:53, 17 April 2008 (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.