Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kealaokamalamalama church

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. — Satori Son 22:29, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Kealaokamalamalama church

Kealaokamalamalama church (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Entirely non-notable church. Google news archives show one hit, someone who was married there. Nothing on its creation, etc. A regular query shows directory listings but no evidence that this church has *done* anything. Travellingcari (talk) 01:18, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

  • Delete. No reason to keep this. New York Dreams (talk) 01:26, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete, no assertations of notability, although I bet their name is fun to say. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters •

(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 01:34, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

  • Delete. As per reasons stated. The church doesn't warrant an article. -Lindsey8417 (talk) 01:36, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Redirect to parent organization. What? There is none? The church is independent? Delete then. --Blanchardb-Me•MyEars•MyMouth-timed 03:50, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete But for its 18 letter name, keala okama lama lama doesn't seem to be any different than, say "Sanderville Baptist Church" Mandsford (talk) 04:54, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom and WP:ORG. No sources are provided at all; I can't even find evidence that this church has a web site of its own. I am also skeptical that the founding minister was the brother of "the first Hawaiian minister in the territory of Hawaii". Hawaii became a territory in 1898, more than 70 years after the kingdom of Hawaii had been evangelized, so presumably there was more than one native Hawaiian who was a minister as of the date the country became a territory. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 05:06, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment. I looked for sources on Google, but I'm not sure that what came back to me was reliable sources. More just sort of trivial directory/guide-type entries... I think.--h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 08:23, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete cool name, still not notable. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 12:59, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete: Here is the church, there is the steeple, open it up, and there are some people. However, with no indication that the building or mission is unique and of note, there is no justification for an encyclopedia article. Utgard Loki (talk) 17:27, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Speedy delete - no assertion of notability, other than it was built in 1934. Bearian'sBooties (talk) 02:19, 9 February 2008 (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.