Misplaced Pages

:Articles for deletion/Sollentuna Parish: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 13:07, 17 October 2012 editChiswick Chap (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers296,151 edits →Sollentuna Parish: then we need RS for the parish, not the church← Previous edit Revision as of 14:19, 17 October 2012 edit undoBonkers The Clown (talk | contribs)14,613 edits →Sollentuna ParishNext edit →
Line 17: Line 17:
:But the parish ''itself'' is notable already, it deserves a stand alone article, rather than a merge to Sollentuna. It has potential for great expansion, with a fair share of cleanup. Merging would swamp potential material. ] (]) 12:42, 17 October 2012 (UTC) :But the parish ''itself'' is notable already, it deserves a stand alone article, rather than a merge to Sollentuna. It has potential for great expansion, with a fair share of cleanup. Merging would swamp potential material. ] (]) 12:42, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
:: In that case we would need citations that show the parish - not the church or town - is separately notable, as notability is not inherited. If you can identify three or four such reliable, independent citations then of course the article can stay. ] (]) 13:07, 17 October 2012 (UTC) :: In that case we would need citations that show the parish - not the church or town - is separately notable, as notability is not inherited. If you can identify three or four such reliable, independent citations then of course the article can stay. ] (]) 13:07, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
::: Hm. Here. Mentioned in many lines in '''The Meaning of Christian Liturgy: Recent Developments in the Church of Sweden''' By Oloph Bexell, Gordon W. (FRW) Lathrop. Also mentioned in quite a few other books, like ''''''Visions of the past: trends and traditions in Swedish medieval archaeology''''', '''Tor''', Volume 9, etc. Notability guidelines say only two sources are needed to affirm notability, so yea, this will pass easily. ] (]) 14:19, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Revision as of 14:19, 17 October 2012

Sollentuna Parish

Sollentuna Parish (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)

One-liner without references of proof of notability. Fails WP:GNG. The Banner talk 00:59, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

  • Do not not not delete (a.k.a. KEEP) Notability is asserted through the availability of sources, not the presence of them. Sollentuna Parish has been around for a few hundred years. Contrary to your declaration of it failing gng, this parish has been mentioned by numerous print sources, as a Google Books search would show. Bonkers The Clown (talk) 04:17, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
But as a weaker alternative, rather than an outright delete, maybe a redirect/merge to Sollentuna Municipality, though that would not be so fitting. Bonkers The Clown (talk) 04:17, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Comment I'm leaning keep on this. After reviewing the Swedish Wiki page on this topic (at least i think the topic s the same) here: http://sv.wikipedia.org/Sollentuna_kyrka. It seems the Swedes have something to say about this place in their country. Maybe we should adapt the English article to mirror this content in English and be done with it. Celtechm (talk) 05:27, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Comment: User:The Banner ("I am a Dutchman but since a couple of years living in County Clare, Ireland.") is fighting a little war against presentation of Sollentuna articles and Sollentuna content, see . So this nomination seems to be only part of the war, not really based on anything substantial. It would be nice if someone could remove this user from editing on Sollentuna related articles or maybe whole Sweden / Scandinavia. Also on his user page he lists no knowledge of any Scandinavian language, whilst listing several other languages. It seems he is not qualified and personally able to judge on the matter. His edits are highly disruptive to the process of improving the English Misplaced Pages. ChemTerm (talk) 06:02, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Keep - is Misplaced Pages a democracy and people can vote on such basic things? I think this is a joke. Voting on having certain content or not. Haha. Yes, I vote for Sollentuna. Shall we delete County Clare - place of living of User:The Banner - instead? Haha. Just joking. But seriously. Keep all verifiable content, even if The Banner ... hahaha ... says it is not notable hahaha .. I can note it. Haha. Just joking. This is so funny. Articlevotipedia. Hahaha ... ChemTerm (talk) 06:06, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
    Nice, instead of coming with valid arguments, you come with personal attacks. The Banner talk 11:58, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
haha, nice indeed. Funny, original material. ChemTerm, you can be a clown. Bonkers The Clown (talk) 12:42, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Merge to Sollentuna Municipality. While we presume that places are notable, there is already this other article on the place, Sollentuna, and it is reasonable to include the parish within it. There is no prejudice against creating an article on churches (for example) of special interest, if there are adequate sources. I note that Swedish WP's "Sollentuna kyrka" ('Sollentuna church') has materials that could be used. And could everyone remain civil, please. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:50, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
But the parish itself is notable already, it deserves a stand alone article, rather than a merge to Sollentuna. It has potential for great expansion, with a fair share of cleanup. Merging would swamp potential material. Bonkers The Clown (talk) 12:42, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
In that case we would need citations that show the parish - not the church or town - is separately notable, as notability is not inherited. If you can identify three or four such reliable, independent citations then of course the article can stay. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:07, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
Hm. Here. Mentioned in many lines in The Meaning of Christian Liturgy: Recent Developments in the Church of Sweden By Oloph Bexell, Gordon W. (FRW) Lathrop. Also mentioned in quite a few other books, like 'Visions of the past: trends and traditions in Swedish medieval archaeology, Tor, Volume 9, etc. Notability guidelines say only two sources are needed to affirm notability, so yea, this will pass easily. Bonkers The Clown (talk) 14:19, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
Categories: