Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Homosexuality and Seventh-day Adventism

:{{la|Homosexuality and Seventh-day Adventism}} – (View AfDView log)

:({{Find sources|Homosexuality and Seventh-day Adventism}})

Wikipedia is WP:NOTSOAPBOX and should not be used to promote personal opinions or to publish personal essays or original research. Nonogyro (talk) 21:07, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

• Merge sourced info into Seventh-day Adventist Church. Nwlaw63 (talk) 21:18, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
• Merge Fails WP:GNG. No secondary sources provided. None of the sources in the article establish notability outside the community of this religion. aprock (talk) 21:19, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
• Snow Merge Insufficient for a stand-alone article, and dicta of a church should generally be placed in an article on the church, not cropping up with every possible issue combination. Collect (talk) 21:39, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:14, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:15, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

• Comment if merged, I hope the content is reviewed for neutrality, it rather strikes me as POV-ish. 78.26 (talk) 03:07, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

• Keep - A glance at the title had me thinking this was a POV essay, but upon closer review this one passes muster as encyclopedic coverage of an encyclopedic topic, in my opinion. Carrite (talk) 03:58, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
• Snow Merge - Valid topic? Yes. Enough material for a full page? No.Tyrenon (talk) 04:56, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
• Keep or merge into a larger article, but the main article is pushing into a too-large-size. Bearian (talk) 15:11, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
• Keep This is a notable topic and merits its own article; other Christian denominations have similar articles, such as Homosexuality and Methodism. I hope this helps. With regards, Anupam^Talk 17:21, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
• Delete - Because it is a WP:SYNTHESIS that fails two of Wikipedia's three core values, being "Neutral point of view" and "No original research", and the third core value of "Verifiability" is stretched to the limit by the use of non-independent sources which have been carefully selected to support the author's POV. Jance day (talk) 21:34, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
• Comment I knew of the five pillars, but I have never heard of Wikipedia's three core values. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 21:38, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
• Keep Clearly a notable topic. The Seventh-day Adventist Church article is already too long to take a merge of this into its Ethics and sexuality section. Maybe this article needs improving for POV issues but that's not a reason to delete or merege it. The title itself is not POV. --Pontificalibus (talk) 13:09, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
• Keep This is a notable topic. The current article does not examine the issue very thoroughly. There is much more information available and issues to be examined. drs (talk) 19:47, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
• Delete - The article in the current form is clearly POV and seems to spread hate. Even though this is written in NPOV (which seems highly unlikely), the content of this article at best can be 'Merged' to Seventh-day Adventism article. Abhishikt (talk) 01:47, 12 February 2012 (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.