Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert Turkel

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, per WP:V - material that doesn't meet it shouldn't be in one article or another. --Sam Blanning(talk) 15:18, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Robert Turkel

Robert Turkel (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

A webmaster of a online "ministry" and author of one self-published book. Arbusto 23:02, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

  • Merge to Tekton Apologetics Ministries which is currently a redirect to Turkel. The ministry meets WP:WEB. JoshuaZ 05:27, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment Wouldn't this be a "Move" instead? Caknuck 05:51, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
      • Well, technically yes. The point in calling it a merge was that the article should primarily be about the ministry with the merged material being, well merged material. JoshuaZ 00:28, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete Fails WP:V. While I am unfamiliar with the Christian apologetics movement, it seems clear that the article doesn't meet WP:V. The only sources sited are either Web sites belonging to the subject or his critics. What we need is a few neutral, unbiased sources to establish notability. As of now, the article fails to assert that subject and the ministry are adequately notable. Caknuck 05:51, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete How does the ministry meet WP:Web? What are all the non-trivial sources? How is it an independent web site? If someone can improve the article, and make it obvious why this is notable, I have no problem with it staying. If not, delete it and the ministry entry. I don't see anyone writing scholarly pieces about Turkel or the Ministry, but again, absence of proof is not proof of absence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Phyesalis (talk • contribs)
  • Keep or at least Merge to Tekton Apologetics Ministries. Holding is clearly very well known to both Christians and antitheists. 58.162.2.122 08:53, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong keep - There was RECENTLY a vote on this whole matter and the vote was to keep. Please see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/JP_Holding

Also: 1) The leading atheist website www.infidels.org lists 40 Christian apologists and JP Holding is listed among them (see: http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/theism/christianity/apologetics.html)

2) Next, well known Christians have spoken favorably of his ministry (if memory serves Hank Hanegraaff" The Bible answer man" on the radio spoke well of Holding for example). Here is a link to one of Holdings articles at his website: When apologetics was evangelism by JP Holding

3) Many well known atheists disparage Holding and these atheists are listed among Wikipedia subject headings. What better recommendation of your relevance can you get than the public disparagement of those who oppose your viewpoint!

I cite:

G.A. Wells (see: http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/g_a_wells/holding.html )

Farrell Till (see: http://www.theskepticalreview.com/jftill/turkey.html )


Holding returns the disparagement here:

G.A. Wells http://www.tektonics.org/TK-W.html

Farrell Till http://www.tektonics.org/TK-T.html


4) Even the www.infidels.org website has mentioned Holding in rather favorable terms.

I cite:

"Updated the author page of Kyle J. Gerkin with an added link to the "Scholarly Diplomacy Series." (Off Site)

Kyle J. Gerkin and J.P. Holding amicably engage each other in an and ongoing discussion of their differing worldviews. The goal is to tear down the wall of antipathy that too often divides Christians and skeptics, so as to foster a respectful understanding of those differences."

taken from: http://www.infidels.org/secular_web/new/2003/may2003.shtml


5) Holding's website gets a lot off traffic and his articles often get high rankings on the search engines as many people link to them.


6) Holding has been published.


7) I know that many evangelical ministers are aware of Holding. I spoke to one last month and he is aware of Holding. ken 16:36, 11 November 2006 (UTC)kdbuffalo

    • Comment first of all, if over a year ago is "recently" then yes, there was a "recent" vote on this. Second of all, due to full disclosure provisions, I will note that ken created this article, and is the main contributor.--Andrew c 16:48, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment I also want to note that the nominator, possibly after people suggested a merge, did an out of process blanking and redirect of Tekton Apologetics Ministries. Sorry, you can't bypass AfD by redirecting articles (if that was the intent). --Andrew c 16:51, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Andrew, you mean Ken, not the nominator (me). It was he who redirected it. Arbusto 03:31, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
      • Additional comment. A correction to Andrew's post. I did create the article but about half the article was created by other Wikipedians by their additions to the article because JP Holding is well known among many atheist apologists and Christian apologists. ken 16:54, 11 November 2006 (UTC)kdbuffalo
        • I apologize if I mischaracterized ken. I just wanted to make sure AfD Wikietiquette was being applied (regarding Please disclose whether you are an article's primary author or if you otherwise have a vested interest in the article.).--Andrew c 16:59, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge per JoshuaZ. KillerChihuahua?!? 21:43, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep Impressive Guy. Well referenced and presented. nascarfan1 18:27, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
    • User's first edit. Also note that the user account is User:Nascarfan1 while the user page is at User:NASCARfan1. Fys. “Ta fys aym”. 00:30, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment: How does this meet WP:WEB (for the merge people) and how does this meet WP:BIO for the keep people? So we have 3 votes for k two are new users and one is the original author. I should have speedied this as it doesn't assert notability. Arbusto 03:31, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete — If you ask me, this article fails WP:V, and the entire article seems to exist in order to promote JP Holding - not to present it in an encyclopedic manner. –- kungming·2 | (Talk·Contact) 04:22, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. This guy is only notable inside his own head. Laurence Boyce 18:57, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete Insufficient reliable and verifiable third party mainstream references presented to establish notability. Edison 05:38, 13 November 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.