| Revision as of 19:27, 28 January 2018 editAlansohn (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers504,512 edits Keep← Previous edit | Revision as of 20:28, 28 January 2018 edit undoRusf10 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users12,121 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
| *'''"Keep"''' Nominaor's ] claim is a false one and does not address article as written. 19th century church buildings are notable in themselves, this in particular because of local famous architect. Minister was candidate for NJ gubernatorial election. Has functioned a religious sanctuary since the millennium. Is well referenced.] (]) 18:28, 28 January 2018 (UTC) | *'''"Keep"''' Nominaor's ] claim is a false one and does not address article as written. 19th century church buildings are notable in themselves, this in particular because of local famous architect. Minister was candidate for NJ gubernatorial election. Has functioned a religious sanctuary since the millennium. Is well referenced.] (]) 18:28, 28 January 2018 (UTC) | ||
| ::The age of the building alone does not give it notability. Even if the architect was extremely well-known (which he's not), it does not given every building he built notability. I don't see the church listed as a historic site anywhere. Even if the minister was a notable person, it still doesn't transfer to the church. However, it doesn't matter because I am 100% sure the minister fails ].--] (]) 20:28, 28 January 2018 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Keep''' appears notable in reliable media for its architecture as well as the politics of its congregation. --] (]) 19:08, 28 January 2018 (UTC) | *'''Keep''' appears notable in reliable media for its architecture as well as the politics of its congregation. --] (]) 19:08, 28 January 2018 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Keep''' The sources here about the church going back more than 100 years establish notability and back it up. Instead of a trout slap here, maybe we should use both ]. ] (]) 19:27, 28 January 2018 (UTC) | *'''Keep''' The sources here about the church going back more than 100 years establish notability and back it up. Instead of a trout slap here, maybe we should use both ]. ] (]) 19:27, 28 January 2018 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 20:28, 28 January 2018
Reformed Church of Highland Park
- Reformed Church of Highland Park (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Church has been in the news recently after a visit by New Jersey's new governor. Misplaced Pages is WP:NOTNEWS. Outside of the very recent coverage, this does not pass WP:GNG as the coverage is not sustained. Rusf10 (talk) 18:18, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
- "Keep" Nominaor's WP:NOTNEWS claim is a false one and does not address article as written. 19th century church buildings are notable in themselves, this in particular because of local famous architect. Minister was candidate for NJ gubernatorial election. Has functioned a religious sanctuary since the millennium. Is well referenced.Djflem (talk) 18:28, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
- The age of the building alone does not give it notability. Even if the architect was extremely well-known (which he's not), it does not given every building he built notability. I don't see the church listed as a historic site anywhere. Even if the minister was a notable person, it still doesn't transfer to the church. However, it doesn't matter because I am 100% sure the minister fails WP:POLITICIAN.--Rusf10 (talk) 20:28, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
- Keep appears notable in reliable media for its architecture as well as the politics of its congregation. --RAN (talk) 19:08, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
- Keep The sources here about the church going back more than 100 years establish notability and back it up. Instead of a trout slap here, maybe we should use both loaves and fishes. Alansohn (talk) 19:27, 28 January 2018 (UTC)