Talk:Longview Baptist Temple

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Christianity Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Anabaptist work group. (with unknown importance)
Assessment comments This article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

It appears that every time this page is put up by anyone it gets deleted by vandals. So hopefully this one will stick. BURNyA 00:51, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

The problem is, the page was deleted by process. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Longview Baptist Temple. I'll move the page to a userpage of yours if you like, but unless this article clear Deletion review, it will get deleted again. —C.Fred (talk) 01:06, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

And process is that when an article is substantially different from the version considered in AfD, it can be allowed to stand. I have reviewed this article against the deleted version and found it to be improved, expanded, and supported with independent sources. Accordingly, this article is no longer subject to speedy deletion for recreation of deleted content. —C.Fred (talk) 23:08, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

I have found multiple areas where information has been removed due to threats of litigation and from pure vandalism, not necessarily on Wikipedia, on other sites. Much of the information, positive negative or otherwise, that I have found have been hard copies. Any archives that should be present seem to be missing. BURNyA 22:22, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

For what it's worth, this is a different (and much better) article than before. I don't think an article needs to go through DR in that case. I would encourage people working on the article to find citations to reliable sources, though. In particular, we should make clear who is accusing LBT of being cult-like, and have good citations for that. I'd also recommend pruning anything that looks like unreferenced personal opinion, like the notion that claims are "hard to ignore". William Pietri 22:17, 26 July 2007 (UTC)