763:- I apologize to everybody if I "wasted your time" and whatnot by nominating this article for the third time. If anybody maybe even attempts to look deeper into the reason I nominated the article, maybe your opinions would not be as harsh. This article was nominated twice before for deletion. During the first nomination, though the discussion was closed as Keep, only three editors out of the five who participated in the discussion actually announced their opinion to keep the article, the creator of the article being included in that number. And from what I gathered from the discussion as a whole, the argument for notability was not very convincing (at least to me), especially since the article's creator was the only one who made any attempt to show that this person was notable. When the article was nominated a second time, it was closed as no consensus since yet again nobody could seem to agree on whether the author was notable or not. Heck, even this nomination has only had five editors comment on it, including myself. So if you really feel I was "wasting our fucking time" and that "this is just one of the countless examples of wasting of time here on Knowledge", as a few editors put it, then I think you guys really have no idea what the point of AfD discussions are, and also you should really check your attitudes, especially since I obviously do not have a whole lot of experience with the notability of authors (I spend my time editing fiction articles, what can I say?). Furthermore, exactly how much thought and time did you really put into this nomination that it was a complete waste of your time? Anyway, fortunately for good ol' George, people have finally found some evidence of notability in this nomination, and I can successfully say I am convinced enough to withdraw my nomination for the article's deletion. —
289:
While his work is represented in a permanent collection by the Dallas
Theological Seminary Archives, I don't know if this meets the fourth criteria, since the criteria states representation in galleries or museums. As well, there are numerous resources available that establish his notability. These
588:
Third nomination since June 2010 ... Is this some kind of joking? Why do you want to delete this article so desperately? It was clearly proved in the previous noms that the information is verifiable and could be useful for our readers. I can't see any benefit in deleting such kind of material. I'd
247:
was reprinted in 1972 and again in 1988, which indicates more than passing importance. Peters was a
Lutheran minister who appears to have been a pioneer of modern fundamentalism, so historical importance there. You put it all together and it's more than enough reason to keep a little stub hanging
437:
happen is carting the article again and again to AfD, hoping to get a "better" result. That is disruptive behavior. This article passed AfD with a KEEP recommendation way back in mid-June 2010. That's a long, long time ago, I know, but I'm gonna stick my neck way, way out there and say that the
732:
to improve this article from 2 lines to C-level, I do agree with that. And it most certainly can be done. The table is pretty well set now. I'll toss up a RESCUE flag and see if someone gets fired up to spend an hour. But three challenges in four months, when the first came in with a KEEP
267:. Has not created entirely new theories? That's funny, considering he's been dead for a hundred years. That said, a hundred years after death, he remains one of the most highly notable religious eschatologists known throughout history. Although, the article should probably be renamed
378:- This stub already passed AfD muster on June 12, 2010 with a KEEP recommendation, then was run up the flagpole again in August with a No Consensus result. It should have been Speedy Kept on the basis of repeated I DON'T LIKE IT challenges wasting our fucking time...
248:
around... I did take the liberty of BOLDLY killing two flags pinned to the top... Obviously, it's a stub so it "needs to be expanded" "by an expert in the field" without having to drop three column inches of warning flags on top of a one line entry...
705:
Aha, sorry. This is a forum for discussing potential and encyclopedic possibilities of one particular topic. On
Knowledge, there are millions of articles needing attention and improvement. It would be nice to see more editors improving the articles.
223:. He has not created any major significant works, nor has he created entirely new theories. This article has been nominated for deletion twice before, and the last time ended in no consensus. I'd like to actually reach a decision this time. —
423:- Actually someone just visited my talk page to tell me that I could have. I dunno, honest people may differ. Let's just say the phrase "wasting our fucking time" was carefully chosen to emphasize my feelings on what seems to be the abuse of
88:
83:
188:
506:
The three books written by Peters are considered to be the most in depth history on the subject. An entire lifetime was spent creating the 10,000 pages of notes and of course his 3 volumes original published by Funk &
463:. I'm a preacher's kid, but fully able to separate my personal religious bent from what is and is not appropriate on Knowledge. And when a spade is a spade... it's just a spade. Maybe we need a new guideline for AfDs.
271:, as this was the name he wrote under, and most people with interest wouldn't know to look under his full name. The research and works he completed are classics in the study of premillennialism. Per
78:
589:
like to know the real reason of this nomination. There's so much work to do here. This is just one of the countless examples of wasting of time here on
Knowledge. All that is masked as a
497:
Deletion?! - This
Wittenburg University Lutheran produced the most exhaustive single work of pre-millennial thought EVER published. It is still being published after over a hundred years.
280:
Peters is an important figure in the eschatological study of premillennialism. He was not only cited during his lifetime, but continues to be cited over a hundred years after his death.
427:
and further to implicitly assert that I'm not a fundamentalist christian with an axe to grind here. The bottom line is this : when a decision is rendered at AfD, it may be appealed to
182:
359:
I've done some rudimentary setting up of the page, the pdf of the finding aid has a nice little bio that can be harvested if anyone has half an hour and needs something to do...
148:
143:
283:
A hundred years after his death, his works continue to be published. He is known for his extensive research and presentation of the theological theory of premillennialism.
116:
111:
120:
286:
He created a significant and well-known body of work that has been presented in multiple independent periodical articles and reviews for well over a hundred years.
541:
103:
770:
742:
719:
696:
661:
640:
606:
578:
560:
476:
447:
408:
387:
368:
325:
305:
257:
230:
61:
715:
657:
602:
352:
Stoll, John H. “George N. H. Peters – a biography.” In The
Theocratic Kingdom, George N. H. Peters, Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 1972.
203:
170:
349:
Smith, Wilbur M. “Preface.” In The
Theocratic Kingdom, George N. H. Peters, unnumbered pages.Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 1957
107:
614:
It would be nice if those who are quick to say how important this individual is when the article is challenged, would actually do
542:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=The+Theocratic+Kingdom&aq=f&aqi=g2&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=
529:
164:
17:
245:
The theocratic kingdom of Our Lord Jesus, the Christ, as covenanted in the Old
Testament and presented in the New Testament
160:
99:
67:
490:- Here's pretty much the definitive defense, reprinted from the June 2010 challenge, which ended with a KEEP result...
49:
711:
653:
598:
210:
785:
428:
36:
438:
notability of a dude that was born 180 years ago hasn't changed a whole hell of a lot in the last three months.
784:
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
339:- This may well be a speedy keep situation, here are some sources listed in the finding aid for his papers:
176:
707:
649:
594:
293:
424:
767:
645:
295:
227:
464:
472:
404:
301:
268:
196:
692:
636:
57:
738:
574:
443:
383:
364:
321:
291:
253:
240:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
556:
530:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=George+Nathaniel+Henry+Peters&start=10&sa=N
272:
220:
764:
346:“Rev. George N. H. Peters: Biography.” The Lutheran Observer. October 22, 1909: 1348-1349.
224:
517:
468:
400:
316:
I concur on the article name change, that needs to be done as soon as this AfD closes.
297:
239:- Appears to be a notable individual. His papers are preserved, here is a link for the
679:
623:
53:
734:
570:
439:
379:
360:
317:
249:
137:
552:
728:
Actually, to put an end to these multiple challenge shenanigans, the answer
275:, the subject of this article meets the first three criteria for inclusion.
89:
Articles for deletion/George
Nathaniel Henry Peters (3rd nomination)
84:
Articles for deletion/George
Nathaniel Henry Peters (2nd nomination)
778:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
733:
recommendation, is absolutely unacceptable, in my opinion.
133:
129:
125:
518:
http://www.theocratickingdom.com/MrPeters/History.html
195:
48:, nomination withdrawn, no delete !votes standing. (
79:
Articles for deletion/George Nathaniel Henry Peters
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
788:). No further edits should be made to this page.
209:
8:
622:—to actually improve the article itself.--
674:You will note that I was simply making a
569:Is there any way to salt AfD challenges?
243:in pdf form. In addition, his 1884 book,
399:. Couldn't have said it better myself.
76:
7:
74:
24:
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
771:02:24, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
743:15:31, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
720:13:58, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
697:09:29, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
662:09:22, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
641:08:44, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
607:07:00, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
579:06:09, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
477:16:15, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
448:15:49, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
409:07:09, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
388:06:05, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
369:05:51, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
326:05:55, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
306:05:45, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
258:05:35, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
231:04:09, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
219:The author is non-notable per
62:07:57, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
1:
540:Google info about his books:
100:George Nathaniel Henry Peters
68:George Nathaniel Henry Peters
805:
516:Short History of the man:
561:01:56, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
429:Knowledge:Deletion review
781:Please do not modify it.
528:Google info on the man:
32:Please do not modify it.
73:AfDs for this article:
488:And another comment
269:George N. H. Peters
646:AFD is not cleanup
50:non-admin closure
796:
783:
689:
684:
633:
628:
214:
213:
199:
151:
141:
123:
34:
804:
803:
799:
798:
797:
795:
794:
793:
792:
786:deletion review
779:
685:
680:
629:
624:
376:Another comment
156:
147:
114:
98:
95:
93:
71:
44:The result was
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
802:
800:
791:
790:
774:
773:
756:
754:
753:
752:
751:
750:
749:
748:
747:
746:
745:
723:
722:
700:
699:
667:
666:
665:
664:
609:
593:. Ridiculous.
582:
581:
566:
565:
564:
563:
547:
546:
545:
544:
535:
534:
533:
532:
523:
522:
521:
520:
511:
510:
509:
508:
501:
500:
499:
498:
492:
491:
484:
483:
482:
481:
480:
479:
453:
452:
451:
450:
431:. What should
425:WP:IDONTLIKEIT
414:
413:
412:
411:
391:
390:
372:
371:
356:
355:
354:
353:
350:
347:
341:
340:
333:
332:
331:
330:
329:
328:
309:
308:
287:
284:
281:
277:
276:
261:
260:
217:
216:
153:
149:AfD statistics
94:
92:
91:
86:
81:
75:
72:
70:
65:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
801:
789:
787:
782:
776:
775:
772:
769:
766:
762:
759:
758:
757:
744:
740:
736:
731:
727:
726:
725:
724:
721:
717:
713:
709:
704:
703:
702:
701:
698:
694:
690:
688:
683:
677:
673:
672:
671:
670:
669:
668:
663:
659:
655:
651:
647:
644:
643:
642:
638:
634:
632:
627:
621:
617:
613:
610:
608:
604:
600:
596:
592:
587:
584:
583:
580:
576:
572:
568:
567:
562:
558:
554:
551:
550:
549:
548:
543:
539:
538:
537:
536:
531:
527:
526:
525:
524:
519:
515:
514:
513:
512:
505:
504:
503:
502:
496:
495:
494:
493:
489:
486:
485:
478:
474:
470:
466:
462:
459:
458:
457:
456:
455:
454:
449:
445:
441:
436:
435:
430:
426:
422:
418:
417:
416:
415:
410:
406:
402:
398:
395:
394:
393:
392:
389:
385:
381:
377:
374:
373:
370:
366:
362:
358:
357:
351:
348:
345:
344:
343:
342:
338:
335:
334:
327:
323:
319:
315:
314:
313:
312:
311:
310:
307:
303:
299:
296:
294:
292:
288:
285:
282:
279:
278:
274:
270:
266:
263:
262:
259:
255:
251:
246:
242:
238:
235:
234:
233:
232:
229:
226:
222:
212:
208:
205:
202:
198:
194:
190:
187:
184:
181:
178:
175:
172:
169:
166:
162:
159:
158:Find sources:
154:
150:
145:
139:
135:
131:
127:
122:
118:
113:
109:
105:
101:
97:
96:
90:
87:
85:
82:
80:
77:
69:
66:
64:
63:
59:
55:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
780:
777:
760:
755:
729:
686:
681:
675:
630:
625:
619:
615:
611:
590:
585:
487:
460:
433:
432:
420:
396:
375:
336:
264:
244:
236:
218:
206:
200:
192:
185:
179:
173:
167:
157:
45:
43:
31:
28:
708:Vejvančický
650:Vejvančický
595:Vejvančický
290:are a few.
241:Finding Aid
237:SPEEDY Keep
183:free images
46:speedy keep
765:Parent5446
591:discussion
225:Parent5446
616:something
507:Wagnalls.
469:Cindamuse
401:Cindamuse
298:Cindamuse
273:WP:AUTHOR
221:WP:AUTHOR
716:contribs
658:contribs
620:anything
603:contribs
144:View log
54:Pgallert
761:Comment
735:Carrite
676:comment
612:Comment
571:Carrite
465:WP:WOFT
461:Comment
440:Carrite
421:Comment
397:Comment
380:Carrite
361:Carrite
337:Comment
318:Carrite
250:Carrite
189:WP refs
177:scholar
117:protect
112:history
682:Jeffro
626:Jeffro
553:BradSp
161:Google
121:delete
204:JSTOR
165:books
138:views
130:watch
126:links
16:<
739:talk
712:talk
693:talk
654:talk
648:. --
637:talk
599:talk
586:Keep
575:talk
557:talk
473:talk
444:talk
405:talk
384:talk
365:talk
322:talk
302:talk
265:Keep
254:talk
197:FENS
171:news
134:logs
108:talk
104:edit
58:talk
678:.--
434:not
211:TWL
146:•
142:– (
741:)
730:is
718:)
714:|
706:--
695:)
687:77
660:)
656:|
639:)
631:77
605:)
601:|
577:)
559:)
475:)
467:.
446:)
419:*
407:)
386:)
367:)
324:)
304:)
256:)
191:)
136:|
132:|
128:|
124:|
119:|
115:|
110:|
106:|
60:)
52:)
768:☯
737:(
710:(
691:(
652:(
635:(
618:—
597:(
573:(
555:(
471:(
442:(
403:(
382:(
363:(
320:(
300:(
252:(
228:☯
215:)
207:·
201:·
193:·
186:·
180:·
174:·
168:·
163:(
155:(
152:)
140:)
102:(
56:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.