Back ویکیپیڈیا:ویکی منصوبہ مسیحیت/تختہ اطلاعات Urdu

Wikipedia:WikiProject Christianity/Noticeboard

Recent changes of Christianity-related talkpages
List of abbreviations (help):
D
Edit made at Wikidata
r
Edit flagged by ORES
N
New page
m
Minor edit
b
Bot edit
(±123)
Page byte size change

8 November 2024

7 November 2024

5 November 2024

4 November 2024


Alerts for Christianity-related articles

Did you know

Articles for deletion

(2 more...)

Proposed deletions

  • 06 Nov 2024 – Sweden Yearly Meeting (talk · edit · hist) was PRODed by Fram (t · c): No evidence of any notability (nor any claim to it as far as I can see), lacks independent indepth reliable sources.

Categories for discussion

(18 more...)

Redirects for discussion

Good article nominees

Good topic candidates

Featured article reviews

Requests for comments

Requested moves

Articles to be merged

(1 more...)

Articles to be split

Articles for creation


Christianity Deletion list


Christianity

[edit]

YC Newfoundland

[edit]
YC Newfoundland (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

An almost identical article was deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Youth Conference (Christian) about a year ago, I can't find anything on the subject except blog posts and primary promotional material. It is a wonderful world (talk) 22:24, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete promotional article Traumnovelle (talk) 00:21, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per GNG given zero credible third party sources cited, nor found in a quick search. WilsonP NYC (talk) 20:18, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bill Wylie-Kellermann

[edit]
Bill Wylie-Kellermann (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No indication of notability. Fails WP:NAUTHOR. - UtherSRG (talk) 00:43, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nog's Vision

[edit]
Nog's Vision (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A draft that was moved into mainspace by its creator. One non-independent source in the article, and a WP:BEFORE returned little. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 18:23, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The one good review above, plus [1]. This says it was reviewed in a publication called Luna Monthly in 1974 as well. PARAKANYAA (talk) 04:07, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Found the Luna Monthly review, it's not super long, but it is certainly evaluative. PARAKANYAA (talk) 04:49, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for finding the Luna Monthly review, PARAKANYAA. That's not enough yet for me to change to keep, as it is a non-notable fanzine. Schazjmd (talk) 15:57, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The notability of a source has no impact on its reliability, or plenty of reliable academic journals are unusable. If you meant just in the context of zines, fair, but it actually does appear to be a notable publication as searching for it in some science fiction history sources showed some sigcov. No one has written an article yet. Zines are not always unreliable, they just must achieve some kind of reliable recognition, for example the albums project has tons of zines listed as reliable sources. It also involved several notable people.
With the Sci fi encyclopedia saying about this publication that it was "notable for its professionalism and its exceptionally thorough review coverage, for which it is a useful research tool. Reviews – some by Greg Bear – were often good", that counts for me. The fact that it was indexed in the sci fi book review index is also a sign that it had some level of acceptance in the wider scene. PARAKANYAA (talk) 00:56, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Meramec Valley Christian School

[edit]
Meramec Valley Christian School (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

My WP:BEFORE search did not turn up any coverage that would indicate that this organization meets WP:GNG or WP:NSCHOOLS. Hog Farm Talk 04:27, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Trafalgar Street (album)

[edit]
Trafalgar Street (album) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Reference is an opinion piece and there aren't other sources for this album, the band's article itself is barely referenced and seems to be taken from a no longer active website. Smallangryplanet (talk) 08:42, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have added some improvements to the band's article. See WP:NEXIST on how to not condemn an article after looking at it just briefly. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 15:21, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Calito Soul

[edit]
AfDs for this article:
Calito Soul (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Reads like WP:PROMO. No real sign of notability here. The concern here is mainly a WP:BLP1E concern which is visible in the lede of the article, which includes "mainly notable for". And I didn't find anything substantial that establishes GNG, and WP:SINGER so I nominate it for deletion.Pitille02 (talk) 22:09, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Atlantic306 Those sources are not Wikipedia:Reliable sources reliable. Pitille02 (talk) 21:12, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They are all used on the Spanish wikipedia article about him, so can you please explain why they are unreliable, Atlantic306 (talk) 21:16, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@ Atlantic306 The item does not comply with WP:RS and does not comply with WP:SINGER. Pitille02 (talk) 21:33, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please be more specific, what exactly is wrong with the sources ? Atlantic306 (talk) 21:35, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Observe the different templates about the sources inserted in the article, in some cases they mention that it is an article with original research/Autoblog. Pitille02 (talk) 21:39, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you can't explain specifically what is wrong with the three sources your argument is baseless, Atlantic306 (talk) 21:50, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Atlantic306 Please read WP:SINGER. Pitille02 (talk) 21:57, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NSINGER is the same as WP:NMUSIC and criteria 1 is determined on the coverage in reliable sources so that is why I asked you to explain why those 3 websites are unreliable, Atlantic306 (talk) 22:00, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you find reliable sources you can provide them. Pitille02 (talk) 22:11, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please give a detailed analysis of the three sources, Atlantic306 (talk) 22:17, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Atlantic306here, Critica, is that a journalistic medium? here This It is an Autoblog or Blog here and this is a Blog, 507 I cannot corroborate that it is a journalistic website and independent of the artist OR TRIVIAL. I also cannot corroborate that this is visible here. Pitille02 (talk) 22:31, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
, ok , i've changed to a weak keep pending the possibility of better sources, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 22:36, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Atlantic306 Apache Ness presents the same problem, the sources are not visible or reliable, this is part of a network of questionable articles without notoriety WP:GNG. Pitille02 (talk) 22:45, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. A full evaluation of sources would be useful at this point since there is some disagreement about them.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:52, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Christian Brothers' College, Boksburg

[edit]
Christian Brothers' College, Boksburg (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No refs on the page for many years. I see some passing mentions in autobiographies and regurgitated PR in local media but nothing significant. I'd be interested to hear if anyone can find much else JMWt (talk) 07:50, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 08:59, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jayson Sherlock

[edit]
Jayson Sherlock (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Run of the mill everyday person that has played in a handful of bands with no particular suitable redirect target. Fails WP:GNG and WP:ANYBIO. Graywalls (talk) 05:03, 25 October 2024 (UTC) The person doesn't pass the threshold for having their own article and despite having considered acceptable red ir or mrge target, there's not quite a right one. Graywalls (talk) 16:36, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As the nominator, I'm open to redirect to Mortification (band) if there isn't a consensus to straight up delete, but I request it be DELETE and redirect so it doesn't get re-spawned into an article of its own single handedly by an editor down the road. Graywalls (talk) 14:42, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - agree with nom. Current sourcing is stuff that can't be used for notability, like band's own page, facebook, youtube. Cannot tell if this guy passes any of the WP:NMUSICIAN checks either such as charting. Bluethricecreamman (talk) 05:51, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'm going to try and find sources for this guy. He was in one of the best-selling heavy metal bands in Australia, at the peak of their popularity, so there's probably stuff out there.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 16:34, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Whelp. There's lots of stuff about the bands he's in/been in, but little about him. I suspect there's probably print mentions in magazines or newspapers, but that's going to be difficult to dig through.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 17:22, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Unless something establishes him notable for himself, I say he's not notable. This works the other way as well. An organization may be notable, but individual members (or groups of members) do not "inherit" notability due to their membership. from WP:INHERITORG Graywalls (talk) 18:49, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Right. That's why I'm not counting that coverage of the bands he's been in, because that would be more appropriate for the requisite articles. I do see that an HM interview is referenced, but not cited, in the article. I'll try and see if I can access that. If it's an interview of "him", that would help towards individual notability.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 19:54, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Provisional) Keep vote, because there's an HM interview with/profile of him in existence. It needs to be accessed and cited, but accessibility doesn't determine notability, the coverage need only *exist*.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 20:01, 25 October 2024 (UTC) Ah, it's accessible online: here it is--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 20:03, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@3family6:, found it. here I think interview with the subject can be used to verify information about the subject but obviously, words from the subject is not independent, so I question its value for conferring notability, which requires secondary source. Graywalls (talk) 20:38, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
that he's covered in an interview by an independent reliable source would confer notability, but it's just one source.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 15:15, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, I can't seem to find anything else. HM mentioned back in 2008 that he doesn't do media appearances, so that one source might be all that there is.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 20:09, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Per WP:BANDMEMBER, he needs coverage about him specifically in order to be notable.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 12:14, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Or you can actually read what BANDMEMBER says and not tell us porkies. duffbeerforme (talk) 00:08, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Members of notable bands are redirected to the band's article, not given individual articles, unless they have demonstrated individual notability. Every band Sherlock has been in is definitely notable, no question. But, and I was surprised at this, so far it appears there's one source, mentioned above, that is about him specifically rather than a band he's part of. Horde was a one-man-band in studio, true, but that's technically separate and any info about that would be duplicated between the band article and this article.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 11:50, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So totally different to how you characterized it above. So let's look at what it actually says, "unless they have demonstrated individual notability" such as by being "a musician who has been a reasonably prominent member of two or more independently notable ensembles." which directly satisfies the relevant SNG. duffbeerforme (talk) 00:50, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's circular. You're saying that they're independently notable because of the bands that they're in and thus should have their own article, and so, because they should have their own article, they're notable apart from those bands.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 22:32, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 06:03, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I oppose that redirect. There are pages of search results with RS coverage about his work in Horde. Horde also was comprised solely of Sherlock for the studio recording. There is plenty of information about him that could go into that article if it was developed more. Plus, there's also a lot of coverage of Revulsed. And that's not to mention his work in Paramaecium (which he was a member of longer than Mortification) and Deliverance. There's too many significant bands that could be the target of a redirect. If one was to be prioritized, Horde would be the most reasonable, imo, because it was a solo project.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 12:26, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How about del for now, but just create redirect later or discuss it in one one of the target page? It's not like it takes more than a few secs to make a redirect. Graywalls (talk) 15:26, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agree.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 18:11, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But why delete. We have a verified passing of a notability guide, and if you choose to pretend that doesn't count we have a good alternative to deletion and no one has raised any pressing BLP issues there is no actual justification for deletion. duffbeerforme (talk) 00:50, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We don't have a verified passing of notability. SNG doesn't over-ride GNG expect for some VERY special cases such as with academic textbooks. 3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 21:45, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Still not seeing a consensus yet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:24, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Christianity Proposed deletions (WP:PROD)

[edit]

Categories for discussion

[edit]

Miscellaneous

[edit]

Developed by StudentB