Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Controversies regarding The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was merge and redirect. I am performing the redirect, people should feel free to merge whatever, as the history is preserved behind the redirect. -- Y not? 03:01, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Controversies regarding The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints[edit]

This article violates NOR (no sourcing for third party sources or assertions of notability of content), and is a possible attack page. There are no citations to any third-party sources whatsoever for the majority of claims - the links that are in the article are to excerpts or official statements rather than sources of notability for the February 16tcontroversies. In general it seems these things are controversial only for non-Mormons, and not to the LDS Church, the same way Jesus isn't a savior for non-Christians (which doesn't make that a "Christian controversy"; in short, it requires a value judgment on the part of the reader being made for the reader, which is not what WP is about. A "Criticisms" article already exists. MSJapan 06:09, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Doesn't pass WP:NOR and WP:NOT. Sr13 (T|C) 07:12, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Criticism of Mormonism- perhaps merge anything that can be salvaged. Thunderwing 10:16, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Additional comment- there is a merge discussion here [1] Thunderwing 10:19, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect as per Thunderwing. Not much to save though. NeoFreak 12:57, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - let's not waste time by only redirecting the problem. --Storm Rider ^(talk) 16:44, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect is sufficient. Duplicated topic that isn't treated very well here, looks better over there. Arkyan  ^(talk) 15:35, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Does not pass WP:NOT#IINFO, WP:NOT in general, and WP:NOR. The whole premise seems like an axe-grinding page, not an encyclopedic entry. There are so many"words to avoid" and Weasel Words there's not much valuable to merge into another article.--TrustTruth 16:15, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Saying that an article is unsourced is not grounds for deletion, unless it was tagged for months and never improved. Instead of deleting the article, why not just tag it for sources/references and see what happens? And, this article should stay for the same reason Scientology_controversy should stay. Just because its only found "controversial" by "non-Mormons" doesn't mean it ought to be deleted. Surprise, the vast majority of people in the world are non-Mormons! Also, criticism of Mormonism is a different topic. Mormonism ≠ Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. Mormonism is a religion. A Church is an organization.--Ķĩřβȳ ♥♥♥Ťįɱé Ø 21:44, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I would also like to say that the article needs to have paragraphs, not this current amalgam of lists.--Ķĩřβȳ ♥♥♥Ťįɱé Ø 21:52, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Just so it doesn't seem like this was out of the blue, it did sit for months - the last meaningful non-vandalism related edit (either way) was on January 20th, and the merger discussion has been open since last October with no apparent result. If sources were forthcoming, you would think someone would have gotten to it by now. MSJapan 22:47, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
CommentKirby, I certainly support your comments, but there is a discrepency between the this and the other article. This is essentially a Category parading as an article. There is not article to it; it is a list. It should be deleted and if someone wants to pen a controvery article, then first look at Criticism of Mormonism, Anti-Mormonism, or Mormonism and Christianity. The article that this is trying to be already exists. --Storm Rider ^(talk) 09:09, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into Criticism of Mormonism. These are duplicate titles. --Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 02:54, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into Criticism of Mormonism per Matt57. Ezratrumpet 01:13, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This page serves a data list function, and has been previously linked from several articles that don't have the space to devote to a list of controversies when those controversies are mentioned as a whole. Regardless, this page will always be attacked by some Mormons who see it as threat their own biased claims although the word "controversy" is neutral. The other problem is that the criticism page is just as vulnerable to deletion and mob POV edits, so merging is nonsense. What it needs is a simple category page. Anon166 15:21, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. It seems that a similiar category page is under attack[2] for the implied reason that it disturbs a true belief to assemble Wikipedia articles under a common theme to address controversial historical claims that come from the same source. "Controversy" is a neutral and valid category that addresses disputed historical claims, not purely religious ones. It would be both POV and anti-historical to suppress it. Furthermore, controversies are established by linking the dispute itself, in whatever form it finds itself. Mormon editors here should state their potential conflict of interest, since some of them have implied that addressing a historical controversy tied to a religious belief is somehow in error. Anon166 18:21, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment you are talking about a Category, not an article. --Storm Rider ^(talk) 09:09, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Useful information that could be diverted to other pages as it is enlarged - for example by proponents or detractors of the controversial claim adding sources. Pbhj 21:38, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and Redirect per Thunderwing. BRMo 21:40, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Criticism and controversy are not synonymous, and lack of sourcing can be fixed. - grubber 18:09, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Obvious Wiki OR. --Blainster 23:21, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merged and Redirect to Criticism of Mormonism. There is interesting information there, but the way it is presented needs significant work to make it salvagable. However, I believe it could be done. Turlo Lomon 13:33, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Mormonism has many questions to be answered. This page is a guide to those questions. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Chiefsalsa (talk • contribs) 22:48, 17 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.