Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Renewal Christian Centre

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 on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. Sjakkalle (Check!) 06:08, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Renewal Christian Centre

This is advertising, albeit not commercial. Delete . jmd 10:31, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

• Keep, assuming the information is true and verifiable. A church with 2300 members is notable. The article obviously needs a lot of attention, but it's enough for stub status (which I've added). --Ashenai 10:34, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Article does not establish encyclopedic notability. Gamaliel 11:24, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
• 2300-strong megachurches are not at all common in Britain. Keep and send to cleanup. Pilatus 14:33, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

* delete this 'article' does not convey basic information ; there is not even a location given for this 'centre'. --Isolani 14:40, 4 October 2005 (UTC) (Isolani rescinds below, so I strike this one. Xoloz 15:39, 5 October 2005 (UTC))

• Keep notable for size in a UK context, and I've added links that verify and could give more information for expansion. --Doc (?) 16:30, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, established church. Kappa 17:27, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
• keep please agree with ashenai that this is important Yuckfoo 18:59, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
• keep I rescind my delete vote as the article has now evolved to a an absolute minimum standard --Isolani 19:13, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
• Keep Established church with verifiable information available will381796 20:41, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
• Keep You may wish to reference vote below on David Carr & Richard Taylor Dlyons493 Talk 22:12, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
• Keep I'm no supporter of churches generally, but mammoth membership equals notability. Xoloz 15:39, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, churchcruft and bad poorly written article about a non-notable church.Gateman1997 18:02, 5 October 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.