Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Louis Vezelis (2nd nomination)
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
- 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 keep. Cirt (talk) 09:18, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
AfDs for this article:
- Louis Vezelis (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Renominating. Fails WP:NOTABILITY. Although he is a bishop, he is the bishop of what appears to be a tiny schismatic sect. Utterly fails Google News test. Few if any independent reliable sources on google. Almost totally unsourced article despite being under WP:BLP. Just a mess. TallNapoleon (talk) 01:49, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Considering when major events of his life occured, Gnews doesn't seem a good way of checking notability. There's some hits for GBooks. [1] Edward321 (talk) 04:10, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, but the utter paucity of sources on regular Google is a bad sign, to say the least. The fact that this article has remained almost totally unsourced for a year is a worse time. I'll take a look at those books, though. TallNapoleon (talk) 05:08, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Schematic of not, bishops are notable because of the influence of their office DGG (talk) 04:14, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Not in this case. DGG, any bishop can ordain any other person a bishop. As many as they want. Now, normally Catholic bishops are bound by the Vatican not to ordain other bishops without permission, but sometimes, one goes off the reservation, as it were, and begins naming lots of bishops. These new bishops can then name more new bishops, and so forth... and they do. Oh God, they do. This is what happened with Archbishop Thuc, who ordained the man who ordained Vezelis. Thuc split from the Catholic Church, and started ordaining bishops left and right, who served the schismatic traditionalist community. Most of these "bishops", however, have congregations smaller than most ordinary parish priests, and are virtually totally unknown outside of their tiny schismatic communities--as the lack of Google hits indicates. As such, his title does not in fact prove notability, any more than any other minister of a small congregation who decides to call himself a bishop. Notability is not inherited--either by blood or ordination. TallNapoleon (talk) 05:08, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak keep I was leaning towards delete but the second cite indicates that the guy is notable for his breakaway sect. ChildofMidnight (talk) 06:21, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 06:52, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak keep - There do seem to be a number of hits on the name in google books, as per here. If two of those are non-trivial, and I think they probably are, then the article would qualify for being kept. John Carter (talk) 14:27, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:00, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak Keep -- Schismatic bishops are nevetheless bishops, but was his consecration in fact canonical, evne apart from lack of papal consent. I thought canonical consecration required the participation of three bishops. Peterkingiron (talk) 00:33, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- No, it only takes one. But just as a number, there are six thousand Catholic bishops in the world today, plus hundreds, probably thousands more Protestant and Orthodox bishops. I would not be surprised if a million people have been a bishop since the time of Christ. Are all of them notable? Last I checked, there was no policy that said bishops are automatically notable. I could be wrong. TallNapoleon (talk) 01:20, 15 June 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.