Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Preying from the Pulpit

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 of the debate was no consensus. Merge tag not added, as there is no FBC, Hammond article. --Sam Blanning^(talk) 22:59, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Preying from the Pulpit

Delete. This is a non-notable subject. It was a nightly news series from an unknown station, on an unknown date, at an unknown time Vivaldi (talk) 08:08, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

• Merge to the FBC, Hammond article. It has little wider relevance outside of FBC and its people. Just zis Guy you know? 08:41, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - not notable enough. - Richardcavell 08:49, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Kimchi.sg 09:09, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
• Strong delete. Calling this a "mini series" seems to be a bit pretentious as it looks to be an investigative report from a local news station aired 13 years ago. I get 26 googles for the report, some of which are not relevant [1]. If this had greater impact - released on video, converted into a book, etc. - then maybe there would be something worth salvaging. As it stands, though, it is not a valid topic for an article, unless we want articles on individual stories from 60 Minutes, A Current Affair and the Insider. -- JJay 11:50, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
• Merge per JzG. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by WarriorScribe (talk • contribs) .
• Delete per nom --Deville (Talk) 03:12, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
• Comment one argument to keep is that this investigative news series is relevant to 3 articles, Hyles-Anderson College, Jack Hyles and First Baptist Church of Hammond, so it would have to be merged in 3 places. However, I get the feeling that this article was created to try and counter certain editors who have been wikilawyering that since the story only seems to exist as a series of mp3 files on a private web site, that it is not a reliable source for those articles. My general feeling is to delete, and reference the broadcasts in the footnotes to those articles where it is relevant. Thatcher131 15:49, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
• Merge per above. -- ReyBrujo 16:31, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

• Keep I am an Evangelical believer, and when someone disgraces the Church in this way I think that there is no point in brushing it under the carpet. Christ will bring the truth on these matters to light anyway. If we are going to close ranks with paedophiles in our midst and not root them out, then we will deserve to come in for the same censure as the Catholics have. Uncle Davey (Talk) 21:07, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Report covers 7 different locations in the US and talks about issues that made national press. Arbusto 00:30, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
• Comment: This report was mentioned in various papers across the country.
• "Preacher has links to molest suspects." The San Diego Union San Diego, Calif.: May 17, 1993. p. A.7
• "Springs drive-by baptisms immersed in controversy." Bruce Finley, Denver Post Staff Writer. Denver Post. Denver, Colo.: Aug 22, 1993. pg. 7.C
• "7 accused of abuse linked to preacher." The Grand Rapids Press. Grand Rapids, Mich.: May 17, 1993. pg. B.2
• "Lehmann, Daniel J. "Pastor Linked to Sex Abuse Lashes Out," Chicago Sun-Times, June 2, 1993. pg. 5"

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.