| Revision as of 04:14, 14 January 2018 editGene93k (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers468,038 edits Updating nomination page with notices (assisted)← Previous edit | Revision as of 04:43, 14 January 2018 edit undoRichard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users195,161 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
| *'''Delete''' -- The article is ambiguous. Is is about the church building or the church congregation? If it were a historical landmark, I would say keep. As a congregation, it is not notable. ] (]) 02:54, 14 January 2018 (UTC) | *'''Delete''' -- The article is ambiguous. Is is about the church building or the church congregation? If it were a historical landmark, I would say keep. As a congregation, it is not notable. ] (]) 02:54, 14 January 2018 (UTC) | ||
| :<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This discussion has been included in the ]. ] (]) 04:14, 14 January 2018 (UTC)</small> | :<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This discussion has been included in the ]. ] (]) 04:14, 14 January 2018 (UTC)</small> | ||
| *'''Keep''' I see enough information for a standalone article per the GNG. --] (]) 04:43, 14 January 2018 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 04:43, 14 January 2018
Second Reformed Church Hackensack
- Second Reformed Church Hackensack (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)
fails WP:ORG and WP:GNG. Most of the information in the article is sourced from the church's website. There are now two book references in the article, each one only mentions the church on one page and doesn't provide any in-depth coverage. The first book has two sentences about the church's architecture and the second book has a paragraph about the church (the same way it does for every other church in the county). I wouldn't call either significant coverage. WP:PROD was "denied" by User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) without any explanation (as usual). Rusf10 (talk) 02:12, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 02:49, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 02:49, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
- Delete -- The article is ambiguous. Is is about the church building or the church congregation? If it were a historical landmark, I would say keep. As a congregation, it is not notable. Rhadow (talk) 02:54, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:14, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
- Keep I see enough information for a standalone article per the GNG. --RAN (talk) 04:43, 14 January 2018 (UTC)