Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Protestant Child Abuse

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Protestant Child Abuse

Protestant Child Abuse (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

Seems like a hit piece. Neutralitytalk 19:07, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

  • Delete. No evidence is presented that any Protestant denomination has been involved in, or been involved in covering up, child abuse. This article makes no more sense than one about Left-hander child abuse. For the article to survive it would have to specifically target a particular brand of protestantism IMO. As it is, it just looks like unsubstantiated buckshot. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 19:51, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete. What's the difference between this child abuse and any other? Basically, what Malleus said. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 20:41, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment: There is child abuse in different places, and this article shows that it exists somewhere where others may not otherwise expect it. Sebwite (talk) 21:59, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep: Valid, encyclopedic topic, with references and reliable sources. Note that I properly formatted the references. Sebwite (talk) 21:58, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
  • None of the references relate to the stated topic of the article, however. What is this "Protestant Church" of which you speak? --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 22:06, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete - attack article. if the Kincora Boys Home scandal is notable enough for its own article it can be on its own. Please also note that there is no "Protestant Church" --T-rex 23:18, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 00:14, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete per User:Malleus Fatuarum. Definite hit peice. Ostap 00:36, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete per T-rex. JuJube (talk) 04:05, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete But in large part because "Protestant" is sort of a vague catch-all term and because the title's wording is potentially POV. Going by Catholic sex abuse cases this should be titled more like "Protestant child abuse cases" to avoid implying there's a "Protestant form" of child abuse. Although the title "Catholic sex abuse cases" is, in my opinion, far from ideal. Something like "Protestantism and child abuse", in the vein of Jehovah's Witnesses and child sex abuse, would be preferable. Still this wouldn't solve that "Protestantism" is itself a vague term, so it'd be better to have "X and child abuse" articles be by denomination.--T. Anthony (talk) 04:41, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete - per above.Counter-revolutionary (talk) 07:49, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
  • keepchristian science monitor makes it come off as notable and having RS to meMyheartinchile (talk) 08:36, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete the article is written with a partisan point of view. Given the issues raised above and the lack of any sources that actually talk about systematic abuse within the "Protestant Church", it would be inherently impossible for this article to ever meet WP:NPOV. Indeed there is no single "Protestant Church" as already noted, so this article cannot exist at this title. At least it would have to be retitled something like Evidence of child abuse within some Protestant churches. But given the sources are about child abuse across multiple faiths, why isn't this article Religious child abuse? The agenda here is very clear and is incompatible with the aims and policies of Wikipedia. Gwernol 10:39, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
  • If there is an article in this content, it looks to be on Kincora Boys' Home. We already have an unsourced stub on that article relevant to The Troubles. Since this article isn't using reliable sources on that material, it wouldn't be useful to merge that content there - let that article be edited by someone who actually has reliable sources to work from. The reliable source [1] is about child sex abuse in American Christian churches generally (Protestant, Catholic, Greek Orthodox are specifically mentioned, and other Christian denominations and non-denominational churches are implied), and probably should be used somehow to introduce some balance to Catholic sex abuse cases - I'll go suggest this on the talk page. If there were an article about sexual abuse in churches generally, or religion generally, the reliable source could also be used there. I don't see any evidence of such an article existing, and one source - particularly a newspaper article focused on a single country and time - can't support one, I don't see anything reasonable to do other than to delete. GRBerry 12:58, 12 June 2008 (UTC)