Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Young Rite

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.  (aeropagitica)   (talk)  12:26, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Young Rite

Gets no Google hits at all outside the organisation's own website. Doesn't meet any speedy criteria though (although I'd argue for WP:SNOW). ulayiti (talk) 16:29, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

• Delete Wikipedia is not for things made up in church one day. "The Young Rite started with the consecration of bishop Markus van Alphen on 4 June 2006 by the bishops Johannes van Alphen, Mario Herrera Jorges and Benito Rodriguez Cruz using the rite of the Liberal Catholic Church." clear violation of WP:NFT. --Daniel Olsen 17:35, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as per above. wikipediatrix 17:50, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete No outside sources on this new religion yet and a disturbing overuse of the 2nd person plural. Isn't Vanity a sin? JChap2007 21:12, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

The content has been updated and expanded on 21 August, removing the use of 2nd person plural. The consecration is indeed verifiable, have a look at The Liberal Catholic Church under the heading "Apost. succession" and follow the link "The van Alphen Succession (by seniority)". As regards Google hits, the group is quite new and has as yet received little publicity. This will change: For example, the Dutch name for the rite is "De Jonge Ritus", and is already referred to outside the organisation's own website. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Markusvanalphen (talk • contribs) 11:51, 21 August 2006 (UTC).

• Comment. Wikipedia is not a device to get publicity for yourself. See also WP:AUTO for details on why you usually shouldn't write articles about yourself or organisations you're affiliated with. Once the organisation is significant enough (say, when it's been featured in a few articles in mainstream media and so) someone will probably create an article about it. - ulayiti (talk) 12:06, 21 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.