Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Bright Path

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 delete. Cirt (talk) 07:42, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Bright Path

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

A promotion of a fresh new spiritual organization of dubious notability - Altenmann >t 21:50, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This organization is the largest of its kind in the world that teaches the Ishaya's Ascension, which is already an accepted entry in Wikipedia. I would think if you accept the belief system as a legitimate entry, then you should accept its largest international institution, whether you think its teachings are dubious or not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joelcan (talk • contribs) 01:48, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tim Song (talk) 00:16, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You appear to have misunderstood Altenmann's comment. By saying that the organization is of "dubious notability," Altenmann is not questioning the legitimacy of the organization or its teachings. The issue is not with the content of the teachings, but with the notability of the organization based on its having been discussed in verifiable sources. Hope that helps. Cbl62 (talk) 02:06, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 01:22, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, but only if external sources cannot be referenced soon. I searched through about 5 pages on Google for any article on this topic from a new age magazine or something, and though there were many entries from various groups who follow this path, none appeared to be from a third party source. If no unaffiliated source can be found to substantiate some of the claims such as "...the largest Ishayas' Ascension organization in the world" then I'd have to say it should be removed with the possibility of re-creation when better sources are available in the future. A brief encyclopedic mention in the main article, Ishayas' Ascension, about this group should be OK. I thought the overall tone of this article was really just fine, not overtly promotional, but alas no sources. Ebonyskye (talk) 01:39, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Ebonyskye. Or in short, there doesn't appear to be any substantial coverage in third party sources that establishes notability. Bfigura ^(talk) 03:45, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless reliable sources establishing notability can be found. --Kinu ^t/_c 04:44, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Nice logo though Shii (tock) 06:26, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge any SOURCED content to the article on the founder, although that article is marginally notable and without refs. let the whole thing grow appropriately. with enough references, it can always be broken out.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 17:26, 10 November 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.