Wikipedia talk:List of bad article ideas
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 Archives |
|---|
[edit] Churches (congregations)
Should we add one about local church congregations and parishes? (As distinguished from denominations.) We're running a about 5-10 through PROD and AFD per day, on average, with (at least for AFD), a deletion rate in excess of 90%. I'm not sure if that is enough volume to merit a mention here.
I'd suggest "Your local church, congregation, mosque, parish, synagogue, temple or other place of worship unless it runs its own broadcast media station or accredited college or has ___." The blank should address historically significant churches.
See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/North County Community Church for a live discussion, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lighthouse United Pentecostal Church Omaha, Nebraska for a recent group AFD closed as delete, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trinity Church, Greenwich for a recent AFD closed as merge to the town article, and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pillar of Fire Church as an AFD closed as keep due to being an international denomination instead of a local congregation. GRBerry 22:51, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Suggestion: Number the list
Doing so would make it much easier to cite something on this page. It can easily be done by replacing the asterisks by "#". Whaddayasay guys? Noroton 03:29, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Status change: essay
After looking at this list and its various versions, I don't see why it should be a guideline. There's nothing on the list of 12 items that I disagree with, but this page seems largely redundant to other existing pages.
- is covered by Wikipedia:Conflict of interest;
- is covered by Wikipedia:Notability;
- is covered by Wikipedia:Merging and moving pages;
- is an extension of #1;
- is an extension of #1;
- is covered by Wikipedia:No original research;
- is covered by {{db-nocontent}} and/or {{db-nocontext}};
- is covered by Wikipedia:Avoid trivia sections in articles;
- is covered by Wikipedia:Notability and Wikipedia:Verifiability;
- is covered by Wikipedia:Neutral point of view and Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a blog, webspace provider, or social networking site;
- is covered by Wikipedia:Neutral point of view and Wikipedia:Content forking; and
- is covered by Wikipedia:Notability and, in extreme cases, by Wikipedia:No original research.
I'm not particularly opposed to anything this page says, but I see no need for it to be a guideline. In addition, the edit history of the page shows that it was made a guideline in January 2006 in the absence of any discussion about the issue. I propose that this page be tagged as being an {{essay}}. -- Black Falcon 00:41, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
