Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of religious organizations

:{{la|List of religious organizations}} ([{{fullurl:List of religious organizations|wpReason={{urlencode: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of religious organizations}}&action=delete}} delete]) – (View AfD)(View log)

Small, very incomplete article. List of religions seems to have this information already and so much more...If not delete them merge with List of religions ...but what do you think? ~B F^izz _(talk) 04:27, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

• Delete. Although this article managed to survive for five years, it is not worth maintaining. The article is just an alphabetical list of a very small number of organizations, some of which are religious denominations but others of which are organizations within particular religions. No descriptions are provided; this is just a bare list. I can't envision the existing article serving as the basis for a better article; if someone wanted to write a better article they would be better off starting from scratch than using this list. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:57, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
• Delete per Metropolitan90's reasoning that if someone wanted to create a useful list like this one they would be better off starting from scratch. It is the poster child for a list of indiscriminate information which is what Wikipedia is not supposed to be. I did chuckle at some of the strange bedfellows and especially odd neighbors because of the alphabetical order. Any list of this sort would need to be arranged by some other method to be useful. Drawn Some (talk) 05:10, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
• Interesting one. Personally, I think it's too big a topic to tackle in one article. It needs to cascade from the generic to the specific.

  A decent structure would have a parent list as a sortable Wikitable, with entries like "Protestant Christian", "Catholic Christian", "Orthodox Christian", etc., and a timeline. Then there would be child lists, e.g. List of Catholic Christian denominations, which could be further subdivided into an intelligible tree structure. Again, a timeline would be essential background.

  This isn't a useful starting point for such a structure, so delete.—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 10:27, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 11:57, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 11:57, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 11:57, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
• Delete The nominator pretty much hit it. Pastor Theo (talk) 14:36, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
• Merge and redirect with List of religions. Same bases and no sense duplicating an article. Ottawa4ever (talk) 19:39, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

• Keep Obviously an incomplete list, however it is quite different than list of religions, this is (or should be) a list of organizations affiliated with religious (e.g. Knights of Columbus is not a religion). dml (talk) 18:43, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
• Keep "Religions" and "Religious organizations" have only a partial overlap. This needs a more precise definition, though the intention is fairly clear: other groups than actual formal organized conventional religions but with religious affiliations and aspirations. Obviously could be much expanded. We ay have to break it down eventually, but that's expand it first and see what we need to do.DGG (talk) 08:49, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
• Delete - seems utterly redundant with :Category:Religion organizations which serves the exact same purpose. -Halo (talk) 04:15, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
• Keep Lists are not superseded by categories - see WP:CLS. Imperfect articles are improved not deleted - see editing policy. Improvement seems easy as nobody expects ... Colonel Warden (talk) 13:10, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
• Keep per DGG, but lead should explicitly differentiate this list from List of religions and lists should minimize overlap.--AuthorityTam (talk) 16:08, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
• Keep Per AuthorityTam. Click23 (talk) 16:12, 26 June 2009 (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.