Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/List of KCC Conventions by Year

I still don't understand why this is not a valid list for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Author pages have bibliographies, TV shows have lists of episodes. Why shouldn't a convention have a list of convention topics and speakers.

I've only just learned the term listcruft. I don't think this list is listcruft. If it was a chronological list of songs sung at the convention - that would be cruft. Listing the speakers and topics is a key part of the historical data about the convention.

The evangelical churches of Sydney, particularly the Presbyterian and Anglican churches, continue to impact the global church. Look at the debates on homosexual clergy in the Anglican Communion. Katoomba Christian Convention is an important part of the culture of evangelical churches in Sydney. The men's convention attracts more than a thousand men over three weekends each year; several hundred each attend the Easter, youth and women's conventions. Along with Moore Theological College, Sydney Missionary and Bible College and the various AFES affiliated student groups, KCC has a significant and continuing impact on the growth of evangelical Christianity in Sydney and beyond. What I'm trying to say is that for evangelicals in Sydney, KCC is a big thing. This list is not for a few, it's for tens of thousands of people.

The convention has waxed and waned with the rest of Sydney evangelicalism, I had hoped that compiling a list of conventions would begin to illustrate that.

I think this stuff is important. I think it is important to evangelicals in Sydney. What changes would need to be made in order for it not to be considered cruft by you guys? Would shifting it back into the main KCC page be better?

- Journeyman 07:32, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would definitely put it back into the main article. I'm afraid your arguments for the list only strengthen the arguments against it: the fact that the organisation itself doesn't even think it's important to have this list. Furthermore "The men's convention attracts more than a thousand men over three weekends each year; several hundred each attend the Easter, youth and women's conventions." This may be good for the events, but it speaks of a relatively small number of people. "The evangelical churches of Sydney, particularly the Presbyterian and Anglican churches, continue to impact the global church." - this is of encyclopedic note and should be included in the article (if it can be verified). I would also recommend that the red links under "List of current conventions" are removed and not turned into articles, because I think they too will get put immediately onto AfD.

Tyrenius 09:47, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would argue the reason the organisation doesn't list the conventions is that it's not the purpose of that website.

I still don't get how a topic or event can be unencyclopedic if it involves thousands and thousands of people a year? Hence my confusion at why pages for the individual conventions would be deleted? If you can have articles on minor characters in comics or a public school with a few hundred students or lists of collective nouns, why not a conference? I thought WP was meant to be comprehensive? An encyclopedia of everything?

Do I understand correctly, that if the original KCC page had a thousand words on each conference then it could be split into separate articles, but if there's just a stub for each, they'd be deleted? Similarly if I had published the full list of conventions from 1903--2007 then that might be OK, but not because it's a stub?

See Wikipedia:Notability as an indication. A minor character in a comic might be very notable for a huge number of people and even be a cultural icon. A public school (whether UK or US type) is an established institution. There has been debate about this, but it tends to favour the retention of school articles. There aren't individual articles on all the teachers, or even the headteachers, or a separate article with a list of all the prizewinners for each year. It's a question of balance and judgement.

I would say that if the original KCC page had 1,000 words on each conference it should be cut back rather than split into separate articles. I think stubs would be deleted or even whole articles. I think a full list of conventions would also be deleted. Sometimes lists with a lot of work are deleted.

Sorry to disappoint. You can always go ahead and create the article(s) anyway, and see what happens. However, also see WP:Vanity. It would be good to contribute to a range of articles.

As far as the list goes, my recommendation would be to put it on another site and link to it from the main KCC article.

Tyrenius 01:26, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I do contribute on a range of articles. I might follow your suggestion on the external link idea. I'm just defending an icon in Sydney evangelicanism. - Journeyman 07:45, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've just had a look at your contributions, so I see you are a good editor. At the moment KCC is only a stub so any split-offs from it are premature. I can see the validity of the KCC article, but I feel the list of talks is too specialised. I can't see that it would be of any use or interest beyond the people that had been to the talks. I suggest a section in the KCC to sum up and highlight any particularly notable ones. Inclusion of references would also be good. Tyrenius 10:40, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]