311:
None of us would criticize anyone because of their religious belief. As noted, anyone can make a website, but not everyone can get coverage in the press. Much of the skepticism comes from the statements that the COH wouldn't reveal its numbers. I do note that there are 900+ "ghits" (hits when doing a Google search), although few that seem to connect to news media. Save the article, since it's been on the deletion log for awhile and might get deleted when administrator has to make a decision. If that happens, you can ask for
310:
That's exactly what would need to be done, Jimenez-- third party sources and a link to any reference as described above. It's not a matter of the church being new, but rather authenticity. All of us here are recommending "delete" because we haven't seen independent proof that the COH is notable.
166:
By searching for "Church of
Humanity" -Marvel -Knowledge (XXG) on a search engine, no reliable sources could be found. (Just forum and blog mention) As a newly begun church, there is no hint of any substantial achievements, let alone longevity. Does not satisfy
297:
Church exists, I'm a member. Seems unfair to persecute a church because it's new. Proof is in member lists and church's written material. Should I list it as reference? Is it even possible to obtain 3rd part sources. What do I do? We'd like to
284:
Anybody can make a website for their personal philosophy, and can claim however many members they wish to. However, the only truly online religion I've encountered has got to be
Knowledge (XXG) itself.
48:. No reliable sources were introduced by the church member who commented last. If non-trivial, reliable, third-party sourcing can be provided, then this deletion can easily be overturned. —
110:
185:
130:
Non-notable, text is a re-hash of that on the "official website", seems to be a marketing effort to get more people into the "church". Basically fails
83:
78:
87:
70:
17:
231:
all real religions or sects should have articles, but there needs to be evidence they actually exist. This has no such evidence.
217:
337:
36:
117:
Notability not asserted, and no independent sources given. Very difficult to find anything relevant on e.g. Google.
319:
302:
289:
276:
264:
242:
223:
200:
175:
158:
121:
52:
336:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
257:
74:
250:
No independent or third-party sources. I'm not saying it doesn't exist, but there is no evidence, as
299:
214:
66:
58:
195:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
168:
139:
312:
273:
151:
272:
per nomination, no evidence of notability or coverage by multiple non-trivial sources.
316:
286:
118:
135:
131:
238:
210:
192:
49:
104:
172:
145:
251:
233:
330:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
100:
96:
92:
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
340:). No further edits should be made to this page.
8:
184:: This debate has been included in the
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
186:list of Religion-related deletions
24:
1:
357:
53:01:04, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
320:12:22, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
303:07:20, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
290:01:02, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
277:23:19, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
265:20:24, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
243:17:16, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
224:13:22, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
201:12:58, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
176:09:19, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
159:09:03, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
122:08:41, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
333:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
259:ZOUAVMAN LE ZOUAVE
67:Church of Humanity
59:Church of Humanity
263:
203:
189:
157:
348:
335:
262:
260:
255:
198:
190:
180:
156:
154:
143:
108:
90:
34:
356:
355:
351:
350:
349:
347:
346:
345:
344:
338:deletion review
331:
313:deletion review
258:
256:
220:
196:
152:
144:
81:
65:
62:
44:The result was
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
354:
352:
343:
342:
325:
323:
322:
305:
300:Jiminezwaldorf
292:
279:
267:
245:
226:
218:
204:
178:
161:
138:and partially
115:
114:
61:
56:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
353:
341:
339:
334:
328:
327:
326:
321:
318:
314:
309:
306:
304:
301:
296:
293:
291:
288:
283:
280:
278:
275:
271:
268:
266:
261:
253:
249:
246:
244:
240:
236:
235:
230:
227:
225:
221:
215:
212:
208:
205:
202:
199:
194:
187:
183:
179:
177:
174:
170:
165:
162:
160:
155:
149:
148:
141:
137:
133:
129:
126:
125:
124:
123:
120:
112:
106:
102:
98:
94:
89:
85:
80:
76:
72:
68:
64:
63:
60:
57:
55:
54:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
332:
329:
324:
307:
295:Don't Delete
294:
281:
269:
247:
232:
228:
209:per above. —
206:
181:
163:
146:
127:
116:
45:
43:
31:
28:
298:cooperate.
274:Burntsauce
317:Mandsford
287:Mandsford
119:Oli Filth
308:Response
219:contribs
211:Disavian
111:View log
193:the wub
169:WP:CORP
84:protect
79:history
50:Caknuck
282:Delete
270:Delete
254:said.
248:Delete
229:Delete
207:Delete
173:Kylohk
164:Delete
140:WP:NOR
128:Delete
88:delete
46:Delete
153:Chat
147:Pedro
105:views
97:watch
93:links
16:<
239:talk
197:"?!"
182:Note
136:WP:N
132:WP:V
101:logs
75:talk
71:edit
315:.
252:DGG
234:DGG
191:--
188:.
171:.--
109:– (
241:)
222:)
150:|
142:.
134:,
103:|
99:|
95:|
91:|
86:|
82:|
77:|
73:|
237:(
216:/
213:(
113:)
107:)
69:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.