Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Agape World Fellowship
=[[Agape World Fellowship]]=
:{{la|Agape World Fellowship}} – (
:({{findsources|Agape World Fellowship}})
No reliable sources found to establish notability of a video game. ([http://news.google.com/archivesearch?q=%22Agape+World+Fellowship%22+%22virtual+reality%22&btnG=Search&um=1&ned=us&hl=en&scoring=a sample Google News search]) No reliable sources to establish notability of a church, either. tedder (talk) 00:49, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:29, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:29, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
- Difficult to judge -- It seems to be an Internet church. With no indication of membership, it is very difficult to determine whether it is notable. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:52, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
- Keep The organization is significantly unique to merit an article. It works in a field with minimal reporting, hence the lack of sources Geoff Plourde (talk) 20:37, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
*Keep - may be rescued, see WP:BEFORE. The links could be used as sources. Bearian (talk) 21:25, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
:I'm less sure now that the links are not as useful as I'd thought. Bearian (talk) 19:01, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - has lots of external links. Some are probably reliable sources that can be converted to references with footnotes. Dew Kane (talk) 04:07, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
- Comment on COI. Appears to be a strong conflict of interest here, per [http://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=Topic:Agape_World_Fellowship&action=history these edits] by Geoff Plourde, and per User:Pastor Bob Shoemaker "also known as EarthTrex" being the primary editor of the article, as well as the founder of the internet church. -- Quiddity (talk) 08:19, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
- Delete. Having actually examined all the links, only 1 had anything to do with AWF. This article has 0 sources available currently, or in google news/scholar/books. I'm usually an inclusionist/mergist, but this article's topic has no current notability. -- Quiddity (talk) 08:19, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
- Delete Unnotable and I most likely just an attempt to advertise various sites. Dream Focus 11:05, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
- Delete. It is difficult to justify retaining this article, because the only source left is the organization website. Quiddity is right, no current notability. No coverage of the organization in the press or elsewhere, and I did look. --DThomsen8 (talk) 20:33, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
- Delete. The "sources" have been shown to be deficient. There is no significant coverage in reliable sources here. --Mkativerata (talk) 20:39, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
: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.