Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Iron chariots

: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 delete. No consensus on a redirect. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:25, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

=[[:Iron chariots]]=

:{{la|Iron chariots}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Iron_chariots Stats])

:({{Find sources AFD|Iron chariots}})

Particular contradictions in the bible do not satisfy WP:GNG - the only press coverage they receive is in apologetics, counter-apologetics, and debates. I think it would also be possible to merge this article into Internal consistency of the Bible, but that page currently does not contain specific examples of contradictions.

Alternatively, the website, Iron Chariots, is mentioned on Matt Dillahunty, and this page should instead redirect there - people probably come looking for that more than they come looking for direct quotations. Gacl906 (talk) 21:53, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bible-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 02:14, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 02:14, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

Delete as a non-notable intersection not given sufficient coverage in reliable sources. Possibly could be kept if broadened out to Chariots in the Bible. St Anselm (talk) 03:36, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
Comment Regarding the BLP mentioned in association with Iron Chariots, the source is a User: page on a Wiki. This is not a reliable source. I found the assertion two other places, but one was a wiki and one was from an announcement of a college philosophy club. If this article is deleted, it should not be redirected to the BLP. Unscintillating (talk) 00:09, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
Delete per nom, redirect would be a bit misleading, and dabs can't have redlinks, so. L3X1 (distænt write) 01:37, 8 October 2017 (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.