Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christ Church St Ives

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 tried to find a way to save this, I really did, but the notability is not there, even after the cleanup. The references are weak, and nothing in the text of the article in any way asserts its notability. The closest I could find was "In 1990 the Christ Church congregation was the third largest in Sydney". Not only is this not notable, but the stat is unreferenced and 16 years old. Turnstep 02:09, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Christ Church St Ives

non-notable CPAScott 03:30, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom. -- Gogo Dodo 04:27, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete, no evidence that this church is any different from any other. WP:NOT the Yellow Pages. --Kinu t/c 05:12, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
    • Then you evidently don't know the Sydney Anglican scene. Christ Church St Ives is very notable. - Ta bu shi da yu 13:49, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
      • No, I don't know the Sydney Anglican scene. Quite frankly, it's not my problem. I go by what's in the article and what I can find from other reliable sources. Instead of insinuating that I am incapable of voicing my own opinion about this subject based on what I do know, try to improve the article instead. --Kinu t/c 01:26, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. Most individual churches are non-notable. --Metropolitan90 05:53, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
    • This one is notable. If you added an article about, say, Berowra Anglican church, then I'd vote to delete. However, Christ Church St. Ives is in fact extremely well known. - Ta bu shi da yu 13:49, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep and cleanup - Christ Church St Ives is one of the most well-known Anglican Churches in Sydney. There are some other Anglican Churches in Sydney that have articles and yet are less notable than this one. The article needs a cleanup but it should stay. (JROBBO 06:00, 9 August 2006 (UTC))
  • Delete Jesus spam --Xrblsnggt 06:26, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
That's not a reason to delete. Please stop being discriminatory. (JROBBO 06:57, 10 August 2006 (UTC))
I have to say that this is the first time I've heard this reason used. Personally I find it inflammatory and unnecessary. - Ta bu shi da yu 13:47, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
Keep - The article is now adequately referenced. -- Mako 08:59, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete, no assertion of notability, possible merger with its location article. --Terence Ong (Chat | Contribs) 10:13, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete - non-notable spam. Leuko 18:04, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. Just as notable as the thousands of utterly ordinary American high schools that we can't seem to get rid of, but I guess it's a good thing that at least some of this site still resembles an encyclopedia. — Haeleth Talk 18:32, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
    • Firstly, are you from Australia? Secondly, are you an Anglican in Sydney? If not, then how do you know whether it is notable or not? - Ta bu shi da yu 13:49, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge into St Ives, New South Wales. JYolkowski // talk 02:13, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete, mention at St Ives, New South Wales. I think JROBBO's comment is probably true, but this article does not show it. JPD (talk) 11:05, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong keep - Christ Church St Ives is an extremely notable church in Sydney. - Ta bu shi da yu 13:47, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
Comment - if it is extremely notable, then its importance should be evident within the article. All the article claims is that is is a "large" church. --Mako 21:33, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
And I totally understand why you think it isn't notable. However, the fact that the article is written poorly is totally seperate to the fact that the church is notable. Just because we have a bad article on Wikipedia does not make the church any more or less notable. Personally, I'm working on Patriot Act articles, which are even more notable, otherwise I'd do something about it. - Ta bu shi da yu 14:51, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
So we are not allowed any time to fix it up? Surely more than a couple of days should be allowed... (JROBBO 23:57, 10 August 2006 (UTC))
Presumably 5 days was deemed significant time to improve any article, or at least put it on the road to improvement, if you think it's too short then maybe suggest so over at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy). --Mako 00:13, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
Had something in the article as it was originally written given evidence to its notability, it would have been tagged with one of the cleanup tags rather than afd. As there was no assertion of notability originally, it was flagged as non-notable and tagged for deletion. This ensuing debate is a process by which such issues are worked out -- and final determination is made by an admin after sufficient debate has passed. There is an improvement tag that can be used to tag an article as "under improvement", (I forget the tag), but I'd assert that articles should either first be developed as a User Subpage until they are adequate enough to enter the article section, or are tagged by the author as needing expansion. My very humble opinion anyway. --CPAScott 17:01, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
You're from California. What do you know about this church? (JROBBO 08:11, 14 August 2006 (UTC))
  • Keep - per Ta bu shi da yu --T-rex 03:37, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Rafy 16:57, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Valrith 20:23, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment - this article has now been fixed up. The things that make it look like an advertisement have been removed, and some notable history has been included in the article. The church is still one of the largest Anglican churches in Sydney. I think that makes it notable. (JROBBO 08:14, 14 August 2006 (UTC))
  • On notability: it gets mentioned (>15 times over the last 20 years, I can only go back to 1987) in the Sydney Morning Herald (SMH) a bit (usually as "Rev Dr John Woodhouse, Rector of Christ Church, St Ives, who will..." etc), but it also has had a couple of articles discussing the history and congregation figures in the SMH (they are now references in the article). There isn't much, if anything, in other big newspapers. In 1990 it was the third largest congregation in Sydney. There was a book published in 1990 (~126 pages, see the Further reading section in the aritcle), I think the church itself published it, but it is available at some academic libraries. Seems like a keep to me.--Commander Keane 10:25, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep: external press and published book show notability. Stephen B Streater 15:19, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
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.
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../a/r/t/Wikipedia%7EArticles_for_deletion_Christ_Church_St_Ives_7ed7.html"