Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Christianity

Shortcuts

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Christianity. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Christianity|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Christianity. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Christianity/archive

Purge page cache

watch

Christianity

Clarksville Christian School

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not seeing a WP:GNG pass for this private school in Tennessee. Sources are:

The school's own publications/websites/channels and thus not independent ([1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6])
Online directory/database pages ([7], [8], [9], [10], [11])
Regurgitated press releases (article, identical release, [12])
An article in the Christian Chronicle, which is affiliated with the school's denomination and thus not independent.
A random link that doesn't validate the claim it purports to.
A WP:TRIVIALMENTION on the school's accreditor (and thus not independent) [13]
Other WP:PRIMARYSOURCES: [14], [15].

I didn't find any other GNG-qualifying sources in my WP:BEFORE search. The page creator unilaterally removed maintenance tags for notability, promotional language and third-party sourcing without coming close to addressing the problems, so rather than edit-war over a tag, I am going to AfD as the next step. Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:54, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools, Christianity, and Tennessee. Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:54, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
While I acknowledge that many of the currently cited sources are affiliated with the school or its denomination, there are also independent, reliable local media sources covering Clarksville Christian School that demonstrate its notability. For example, Clarksville Now and The Leaf-Chronicle have reported on CCS’s accreditation milestones, scholarship achievements, and athletics, providing substantive coverage beyond routine directory listings or press releases. Additionally, local news outlets have covered CCS events and student accomplishments in a way that goes beyond trivial mention.

I am actively working to incorporate these independent third-party sources into the article to strengthen its verifiability and comply with WP:GNG. I respectfully request additional time to improve the article with these reliable sources before any deletion actions are taken. GatewayPolitics (talk) 03:02, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also you could have taken these concerns to my talk page before taking this step. GatewayPolitics (talk) 03:04, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(You could also have taken your perspective to a talk page before unilaterally removing the maintenance tags on a page you created. Your removal of them is what prompted me to do a WP:BEFORE search that turned up no qualifying sources.) Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:18, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Those articles I saw in my BEFORE search; they all appear to be based on or just reprints of press releases from the school. I have not seen anything that constitutes WP:SIGCOV in an independent, reliable, and secondary source. Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:14, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I hear what you’re saying about the sources, and I understand the importance of meeting WP:SIGCOV. That said, I think tagging or taking further steps without any prior discussion — especially when some effort was clearly made to include sources — feels a bit premature. A quick note on the talk page could’ve opened the door for collaboration rather than escalation. I’m still open to improving the sourcing if better material exists, but I think we should be careful not to rush into cleanup actions without first giving editors a chance to respond. GatewayPolitics (talk) 03:18, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Deletion discussions run 7 days so you have plenty of time. If you supply sources that pass the test of GNG, the page will be kept. Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:19, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Dclemens1971 I have cleaned it up. Any other things that need to be changed? GatewayPolitics (talk) 03:44, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I still don't see any sources that support notability. The Clarksville Now piece appears to be based on a pair of press releases from the school ([16], [17]) and the Leaf-Chronicle link is to a "subscribe" page. Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:53, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I changed it a bit more and I believe that the article is good and is notable enough. I will have to see other opinions, and will respect the outcome. GatewayPolitics (talk) 04:04, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Proclaim!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable local television program; no independent in-depth sources found online ForsythiaJo (talk) 01:59, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Christianity. ForsythiaJo (talk) 01:59, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Non-notable. Very local niche show. — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 03:49, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media and Pennsylvania. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:22, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pope Benedict XV and Russia

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article would be better off as simply a subheading of the Diplomatic agenda section of the main article, but merging it does not seem viable because it is simply not up to encyclopedic standards. The talk page reveals possible copyvio issues as well. It appears to be substantially the same as it was in 2009.

If this article is not to be deleted/merged, it would need to be completely rewritten by someone with subject expertise or at least competence. M.A.Spinn (talk) 20:03, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:29, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:30, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations and Christianity. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:15, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:TNT and WP:V. As written, we can't verify anything. Was this written by a chat bot? It's too much of an essay, and the citation format is unique at best. Bearian (talk) 01:48, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or not opposed to draftify to improve the citations issue not being readily verifiable.Lorraine Crane (talk) 17:41, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of works depicting Jesus as LGBT

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails NLIST -- no coverage of this concept by external sources. Jay Cubby 22:29, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Popular culture, Sexuality and gender, and Christianity. Jay Cubby 22:29, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for raising this, Jay. I welcome the opportunity to find some more sources for an article I wrote a while ago.
- Shore-Goss, Robert E. (2021). "Queering Jesus: LGBTQI Dangerous Remembering and Imaginative Resistance". Journal for Interdisciplinary Biblical Studies: 47–70. doi:10.17613/9exn-n122.
  Queer folks liberate Jesus’s fleshliness imprisoned within Christian heteronormative and cisgender theologies—promoted by the biblical industrial complex and aligned with authoritarian politics. Queer imaginations have unleashed perverse impulses that reinscribe Jesus within a variety of artistic mediums. Anthropologist Will Roscoe reclaims Jesus in the shamanic tradition of same-sex love, while in Jesus in Love, Kittredge Cherry re-imagines a bisexual, transgender Jesus, who is also an erotic mystic, manifesting a gender fluidity. ... On Netflix, there is a Brazilian film portraying a gay Jesus and weed-smoking Mary. Jesus comes out the wilderness with a young gay companion named Orlando, and they are erotically involved. ... Kittredge Cherry ... worked with gay artist Douglas Blanchard on The Passion of the Cross: A Gay Vision, which depicts Jesus as a contemporary gay man who suffers and dies from fundamentalist Christian hatred in 24 stations of the cross. ... The British transwoman Jo Clifford wrote and produced a one-woman play, The Gospel According to Jesus Queen of the Heaven, at the Edinburgh fringe festival. ... Finally, Terrence McNally’s play Corpus Christi has received threats and protests from the Catholic League and other Christian fundamentalist groups as it opened at the Manhattan Theater in 1998 and was forced to close down two weeks later.
- Martins, Flávio (1 January 2025). "Artistic Freedom and Religious Sentiment". Aracê (in English and Brazilian Portuguese). 7 (1): 110–128. doi:10.56238/arev7n1-007.
  Cases involving satirical cartoons of a religious nature also illustrate the complexity of the theme. ... In the United States, Terrence McNally's play Corpus Christi, which portrays Jesus as homosexual, has faced censorship and protests. ... In Brazil there was a very similar case in 2018. The play The Gospel According to Jesus, Queen of Heaven, written by British playwright Jo Clifford, was staged in the interior of São Paulo. The play presented Jesus as a transsexual woman. ... The case involving the 2019 Christmas special, produced by the comedy group Porta dos Fundos, entitled The First Temptation of Christ, is a milestone in the debates on artistic and religious freedom in Brazil.
- Bádue, Alex; Jay, Jeff (2 September 2022). "Queer performance and indecent theology in the Gospel according to Porta dos Fundos". Theology & Sexuality. 28 (2–3): 112–130. doi:10.1080/13558358.2023.2225369.^TWL
  In 1996 Leo Steinberg described the sexuality of Christ as “Christianity’s greatest taboo.” Those who dare, as Kwok Pui-Lan argues, to touch this taboo almost as a rule meet disbelief, disgust, protest, threats, and sometimes violence. Representations of Jesus in film and drama provide no exception. The First Temptation joins a distinguished list of targets, which include Scorsese’s The Last Temptation of Christ and Terrence McNally’s play Corpus Christi, in which Jesus and the apostles appear as gay men in Texas. Bomb threats against the latter elicited security measures at performances. The erotic life of Jesus, even the straight Jesus but more intensely the gay one, remains taboo, and those who touch risk scorn.
I'll have to look into including some of the ones Shore-Goss mentioned that currently aren't in the list. For what it's worth, even if none of this coverage existed, I'd still argue that this passes WP:NLIST on navigational grounds, namely that it replaced a bunch of see-alsos from the different articles to one another, and keeps them from all needing to be see-also'd from Sexuality and marital status of Jesus (where we're now able to have an easy hatnote for the Gay Jesus redirect). -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 23:32, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've added Cherry's books, but left out Blanchard as failing the inclusion criteria for the list. On which note, I've added a section on talk detailing the inclusion criteria I've been using. Feedback welcome. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 00:49, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: There's also this source. I'd tend to agree with Tamzin that this passes WP:NLIST. Dclemens1971 (talk) 23:56, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Removed the image though, the inclusion of which was OR. Dclemens1971 (talk) 23:58, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No objection there, wasn't my doing. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 00:20, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - just reports the facts. Bearian (talk) 01:32, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:47, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep sourced ProudWatermelon (talk) 00:04, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep well-sourced and notable. wound theology ◈ 06:30, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - No doubt over notability. It needs more expansion. Azuredivay (talk) 18:07, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If there's other works you know of to add, feel free! I was expecting there to be relevant coverage of some Sufjan Stevens works, like "John My Beloved" ("I’m holding my breath / My tongue on your chest / What can be said of my heart? / ... / Beloved, my John, so I’ll carry on / ... / Jesus, I need you, be near me, come shield me"), but I haven't been able to find it. Similarly, someone on Reddit, where this list was recently posted, suggested Benedetta (film), but I couldn't find sources characterizing its depiction of Jesus with a vagina as any particular kind of LGBTQ. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 19:51, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Guy Pagès

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No sources giving significant coverage are on the article and a search has not revealed any WP:SIGCOV in any reliable source. Boynamedsue (talk) 18:32, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Christianity, and France. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:03, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per nom. ~Darth Stabro^{Talk • Contribs} 19:48, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Lacks significant coverage in reliable sources. We are not an Amazon company. We are not a soap box. Bearian (talk) 08:48, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: As someone in the relevant academic field he's both not someone I haven't heard of inasmuch as I'm vaguely aware of figures in far-right politics and Islamophobia in France who are involved in Catholic-Muslim relations but at the same time he's also not someone I can find much in the way of verifiable sources dealing with him. He's mentioned in brief in a French polemical book written to criticize Pope Francis from a secular liberal perspective and he's mentioned in some literature on Christian eschatology for his diatribes against Hans Urs von Balthasar but there's not really anything to establish notability. So with that in mind, Delete per the foregoing. M.A.Spinn (talk) 17:19, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Divine Mercy Catholic Elementary School

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable run-of-the-mill elementary school. Only independent coverage cited is a database entry; nothing beyond the school district found on search. Could reasonably redirect to Toronto Catholic District School Board. — Moriwen (talk) 18:38, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, and Christianity. — Moriwen (talk) 18:38, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per nom ~Darth Stabro^{Talk • Contribs} 18:57, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:03, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: schools are not inherently notable, here there is no significant coverage that I can see and thus fails WP:NSCHOOL. --hroest 20:57, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect - per WP:ATD and longstanding practice. Pertinent details can be added to the school board article which already has a mention of it. 4.37.252.50 (talk) 18:01, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Geneviève Jeanningros

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. She briefly went viral during Pope Francis's funeral, but other than that... she's just a nun. Luxic (talk) 21:12, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, Religion, Christianity, Europe, and France. Luxic (talk) 21:12, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Previous independent in depth coverage here[18], here[19] and here[20]. Pope Francis mentioned her in print[21][22] and she's been mentioned in books about Francis[23][24]. Additional coverage here[25]. Jahaza (talk) 20:28, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I think it's worth noting that all those sources only mention her in relation to Pope Francis (or she's mentioned by Francis himself). I still fail to see what would make her notable in her own right, regardless of her connection/friendship with the late pope. Luxic (talk) 21:21, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Argentina-related deletion discussions. Jahaza (talk) 20:37, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:32, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Enough coverage in RS. Not only in books but in The New York Times, The Telegraph, The Washington Post, Agence France-Presse. I added a Reuters and a People.com reference. The article has room for improvement, but notability is proven. It's not just 1E in the pope's funeral. — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 18:10, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dee Brestin

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:BIO. Disputed draftification. WP:DRAFTOBJECT prohibits unilateral return top Draft. WP:ROTM author. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 15:38, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Authors, Women, Christianity, and United States of America. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 15:38, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Illinois, Missouri, and Wisconsin. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:00, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete None of the references meet WP:RS standards and at least half are just profiles on non-independent sites. Best, GPL93 (talk) 18:10, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've found a couple independent sources covering Brestin's work, namely, a 2010 review of her book in the journal Death Studies; a 2019 Publishers Weekly book review; and a bit of analysis of her 2002 book by Kathaleen Amende in Desire and the Divine: Feminine Identity in White Southern Women's Writing (Louisiana State University Press). There's also an interview with Today's Christian Woman magazine she did alongside a co-author, though I'm not sure how much that factors into WP:NAUTHOR. These sources have been added to the article. Best, Bridget (talk) 15:21, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, per the sources provided above and below by Nnev66 for WP:NAUTHOR. Bridget (talk) 13:20, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I found newspaper articles about the subject, two of which were about her book "The Friendships of Women" and I've added them to the article. With the sources Bridget found, meets WP:NAUTHOR #3 and possibly WP:GNG. Nnev66 (talk) 19:36, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as the additional reliable sources coverage identified in this discussion shows a pass of WP:GNG so that deletion is unnecessary in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 21:18, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:42, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify: I just want to say that this is incredibly poorly written. I fixed a few of the worst mistakes. It's almost impossible to get past the typos for me to judge the notability of the subject. Bearian (talk) 04:26, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Loyola Jesuit College

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Seems to lack WP:SIGCOV and has had WP:PROMO edits. In WP:BEFORE did not find reliable sources such that WP:GNG fails here. Iljhgtn (talk) 02:36, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools, Christianity, and Nigeria. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:19, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Very week keep The promo in the past is true but I think the school barely makes the cut. Google used to be bad in covering African news sources in their indexing process but I don't know if that is still the case. If so, there should be untapped sources available on paper but not on the internet. The Banner talk 11:19, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not that I can find in my Wikipedia:BEFORE. If you find enough for coverage, I could withdraw my nomination, but I did not find much on this "college". Iljhgtn (talk) 18:56, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete lacks the notability required by the general notability rules. No sign of notability and no good media sources could be found.--Amlikdi (talk) 07:08, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Check the References list now. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 06:00, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I do not think this meets the WP:GNG and lacks WP:SIGCOV, we would need more sources to bolster inclusion. Gjb0zWxOb (talk) 14:15, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Check the article now please. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 05:59, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
keep this case is different from all the other WP:ROTM local high schools, according to local sources this is one of the top (or the top) schools in the country. See this report in Business Day and this source linked in the article [26]. There is some coverage in this book spanning almost a full page 282. Given the amount of coverage available online and its clear standing locally, as well as all the coverage about the plane crash, this should pass WP:NSCHOOL. --hroest 20:43, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"report in Business Day"? That is a weak listicle at best. Not notable. Iljhgtn (talk) 01:57, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep: I think it is better that editors mention that they did no BEFORE on an article than saying suh when nothing was done. I was just looking at these mountain of sources: on Google Scholar, Google books, Archived newspapers, and news websites. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 22:24, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Those are not sources ABOUT the college, but are mere passing mentions in some academic citations. Nothing in your so called "mountain of source" [sic] makes this notable. Iljhgtn (talk) 01:55, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Iljhgtn, please show me the sources that are not reliable or independent. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 19:41, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Looked at them again, tell me please which of them ARE in fact good for establishing notability as reliable and independent! There is no way this article passes GNG. and it has NOT been "greatly improved since...nomination" at all. Iljhgtn (talk) 20:37, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The article has been greatly improved since its nomination, to pass WP:ORGCRIT and meet WP:GNG. King ChristLike (talk) 05:40, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That is simply not true... more junk has been added, but it has not been improved or made notable. Look at the sources. Iljhgtn (talk) 17:32, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – robertsky (talk) 14:38, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 04:15, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep: The article doesn't seem to violate WP:PROMO as a whole, and it seems to have enough content and references to merit keeping it. The issue is there isn't much legitimate notability, a simple google search leads to less than 1 page of results.

Good Day (Forrest Frank song)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Redirect to Child of God (album). Despite charting, the song is not covered in reliable sources, thus failing WP:NSONG. UnregisteredBiohazard (what i do • what did i do now?) 04:23, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and Christianity. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:51, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: There is a passing mention in a Billboard article [27] but that's about it for WP:RS. UnregisteredBiohazard (what i do • what did i do now?) 17:54, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: I increased the amount of secondary sources in the article, if that's what you're requesting.
  01:26, 12 May 2025 (UTC) Javajourney (talk) 01:26, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  
  Thanks for adding more. However, I'm not sure if most of the sources are WP:RS. UnregisteredBiohazard (what i do • what did i do now?) 15:23, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Per Above Destinyokhiria (talk) 13:25, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Since this song won a Dove Award (which would help it meet WP:NSONG criteria), I withdraw this nomination. UnregisteredBiohazard (what i do • what did i do now?) 17:20, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep song has won an award and was nominated for another two. Some sources in the article don't seem reliable. I removed a striking one. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 06:36, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Nomination can not be withdrawn once a "delete" !vote has been cast.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:53, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 02:07, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Christianity Proposed deletions (WP:PROD)

CFSO-TV (via WP:PROD on 14 May 2025)

Categories for discussion

Christian religious leaders: further follow-up required, see Category talk:Religious leaders#Clergy categories

Miscellaneous