Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Unification Church political views

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 merge and/or transwiki.. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 15:25, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unification Church political views

This article is mainly WP:Original research. It takes a bunch of quotes from Unification Church sources and proclaims that this represents "Unification Church political views" without any secondary sources that say so, or even recognize that "Unification Church political views" is a notable topic. Steve Dufour (talk) 11:46, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete:~~ Break up (per Jclemens) mostly a quotefarm of UC quotations, often with little tying them together or to the article topic. No evidence of WP:NOTE, and if an article establishing notability for this topic were eventually to be written, it'd have to be a re-write from scratch. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 14:55, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Would be agreeable to moving the excess quotations to wikisource & merging whatever of the remainder isn't WP:OR. Likewise prefer 'Political activities of the Unification Church' to any of the extant article titles. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 05:12, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I much agree that "political activities of the Unification Church" is a better title. Then it could be about things people did, not just other people's opinions about their "views." Borock (talk) 17:46, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. -- — LinguistAtLarge • Talk 15:29, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Break it up and move most of the primary source quotes/text to Wikisource. The rest of it can probably be merged into other UC article(s) (perhaps Unification Church and political involvement?) without losing content. Jclemens (talk) 16:10, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with Jclemens. This title is probably superior to Unification Church and political involvement, although I would prefer Political activities of the Unification Church to either of them. The Rev. Moon quotes are better sourced than much of the material on Wikiquote, and should be transwikied to his page there if they aren't already. The subject is certainly worthy of treatment somewhere or another. I am also sure that second party commentary on the Unification Church's politics is probably not hard to find. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 16:27, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete/Transwiki I absolutely believe there is a useful and valuable article on this subject, and just as soon as someone cites the journalist or scholar who has written and published that article, we can make one here. In the meantime, this is a primary-source amalgamation, amounting to an OR synthesis. - Markeer 21:24, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

About sources, this one didn't exactly make any best-sellers lists. :-) Steve Dufour (talk) 20:45, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge - as Ihcoyc said, the article Unification Church and political involvement already exists regarding this topic. Maybe change the name to something more inclusive like "Politics and the Unification Church"...once we can get citations for the material that is presently in the article nominated for deletion. _scootey ^talk 22:27, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge, agree with Scootey (talk · contribs). Cirt (talk) 23:12, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is just a collection of quotes, as the nominator said. All of them are from Unification Church primary sources, with one exception which is the opinion of a leading critic: That is from his website and borders on a BLP violation.Borock (talk) 17:44, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If it’s not Merged some where else – Delete . I do not see notability here also Wikipedia is not a list or repository of quotations. A simple list of quotations would be better suited for Wikiquote. Similarly, quotations should always be presented with an introduction; a stand-alone quotation is not a proper paragraph. Quotations should be put in context and given any necessary explanation. Agree with comments by Hrafn, Borock and Steve Dufour Jlrobertson (talk) 18:50, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Break up and merge (per Jclemens). There are literally thousands of references to the Unification Church and political involvement in academic publications and news articles going back at least to 1974, including many on the relevant teachings/beliefs of the church. (Actually, one academic source from 1966 that comes to mind might have something useful.) If someone wants to take the time to find some of them, an article with substantial notable material could easily be put together (or in this case, Unification Church political activities could be expanded to include some of it). -Exucmember (talk) 07:57, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.