Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/First Lutheran Church of Venice

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 No consensus -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 18:52, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

First Lutheran Church of Venice

First Lutheran Church of Venice (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Notability has not been established, and I doubt that a church of 300 members counts as notable (even if it is the third largest church in the circuit). Also, the only links are to the church and synod, which aren't verifiable per WP:V. --Адам12901 ^Talk 06:57, 8 February 2007 (UTC) Адам12901 ^Talk 06:57, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Merge to local area article; Fails WP:CHURCH in having its own area. Its size may be large but there are no non-trivial sources documented which explain the significance of its size. JROBBO 11:02, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Keep - note correction that it's the largest in its circuit, and third largest LCMS church in Los Angeles (out of 27); also, Lutheran churches in the U.S. tend to be under 400 members (this one is larger than average for its LCMS district). In addition, Lutheran churches use congregational governance (each congregation is independent of the synod), which means that synod sources/materials count as an independent source. There are other ways in which the church qualifies as being notable, though they aren't in the article currently; there's a strong music program which has received coverage in local press, and a notable external mural has also been covered locally. (There are also a few notable members who have their own WP articles, some of whom are significantly involved in church programs - though I'm not sure how much external sourcing would be available to mention this.) I've added some other notes in the deletion proposal for another congregation; I don't think it's advisable to delete articles in an area that Wikipedia doesn't yet cover very well, even when they are still stubby. The article for Venice itself is already 31K, so I don't think merging is ideal; adding material to that article regarding every local church and religious group would soon result in moves to split off new articles again. MisfitToys 20:06, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

I'll also add a note (which I've also posted for the other deletion nom) that this nominator has proposed deletion for numerous church articles in the past (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Saddleback Church and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bayside Community Church for two major examples); maybe it's not a reflex action, but it strikes me as an inclination to regard with caution. (And he's been very quick to use WP:CHURCH as basis for deletion, even when that proposed guideline has been in early draft stages and has not achieved general acceptance.) MisfitToys 20:21, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Delete or failing that Merge. The article does nothing to assert notability. Even with 331 members making it the 3rd largest in the LA area, it is simply not notable. Vegaswikian 01:30, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

NOTE: I've added some material on the church's artistic programs, with references; this should cover #1 and #8 under WP:CHURCH. MisfitToys 22:26, 12 February 2007 (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.