Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gilwood Presbyterian Church

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 without prejudice. east.718 at 02:21, 11/5/2007

[edit] Gilwood Presbyterian Church

Gilwood Presbyterian Church (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Article on an average church with nothing to distinguish it from any other PCUSA congregation. Nyttend 03:15, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

• Delete Mainly reads like a directory. ≈Alessandro ♫ ^{T • C} 05:29, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
• Delete could probably be a sd candidate per a7. Like Alessandro mentioned, reads like an advert for the church, and was created by User:PastorMatt, possible COI. faithless (^speak) 06:27, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per Alessandro and faithless Subdolous 20:01, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
• No Delete article is historical in nature, and is key to the understanding of linked article Odell School, North Carolina. I have no current connection to the church, other than having grown up attending it.PastorMatt 03:44, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

What does "historical in nature" mean? Are you saying that it is a church of historical significance? If so, please demonstrate that; no one here wants to delete a good (or potentially good) article, but currently this article doesn't tell us why this particular church is notable. Has the church witnessed a historic event, was it designed by a famous architect, or something of that nature? Keep in mind, when telling us why the church is important be sure to back up claims with reliable sources. But keep in mind that churches usually don't meet notability requirements. Perhaps it would be prudent to merge this article into the article for the town you mentioned? If you're convinced that the church is notable, try to find some sources in reliable, independent media (most likely the local newspaper or books written on local history). A pretty good (and very convenient) way of finding sources is using Google News and Google Books. A church doesn't need to be St. Peter's Basilica to be notable, but it does need something. I recently created an article for a local church; you can give that a look to see an example a church which is notable even if it isn't world-famous. faithless (^speak) 01:13, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Your battlefield is not my battlefield, nor your values mine. We are mutually irrelevant. PastorMatt 05:48, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, are you addressing me? I'm trying to help you save your article, and you have apparently responded with a cryptic and confusing (and not terribly friendly) message. faithless (^speak) 06:43, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

• Comment What do you mean? I too am a Presbyterian Christian, but I believe that this article should be deleted because it fails the notability guidelines. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nyttend (talk • contribs) 05:52, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Nothing notable or distinguishing here, just a description, address and phone number. If there's something special about this church that makes it deserve its own article, it should be explicitly noted. -- Dougie WII 17:31, 1 November 2007 (UTC) (another Presbyterian)
• Delete per nom, NN church. Bearian'sBooties 19:26, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Folks, I can only write of the things I know. I have done so, and spread it out before you. If left online, I will likely expand on it as some of you have suggested, but time and life does not allow me to do so right now. Then again, someone else with more perfect knowledge and love of the subject might see my work, and take up the mantle of improvement.

I have put my knowledge out in front of you. If you choose to eliminate it from your sight, so be it. If not, it might turn out to be an interesting, and useful article.

Another thing, please don't say delete if your intention is to salvage, improve or save an article. That is really unfriendly. PastorMatt 01:07, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Comment Frankly I don't say "delete" if I intend to salvage, improve, or save an article. I say "delete" if I intend to delete an article. Here's my advice for you: if you want to repost it with proof of notability, copy the text onto your computer and don't repost it until you have added (onto the text file) proof of notability. Nyttend 02:34, 3 November 2007 (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.