299:
the article, as the guy is clearly a notable figure (as a published author and controversial religious commentator) despite the difficulty we seem to be having in finding appropriate references. I think the references and links we have are enough to establish his notability, even if they are perhaps
265:
Well it seems some people really went after this article with a vengeance. Adding way too many {{fact}} tags (eg. for things that already had references mentioned) and generally acting in bad faith. Anyway, I've been trying to fix things up and I have added a few new references. I'd also like to
126:
Procedural nomination: I previously stubbed this article because of BLP concerns. It was later PRODded by another editor, but this was removed with the addition of some external links which don't look entirely convincing. Therefore, I have brought it here - I have no opinion.
583:
True, he's not widely known (and that through his Chick connection), but he's likely to be read in some
Fundamentalist church circles, and seen as "authoritative" despite facts to the contrary. (Also, young people in and around Fundamentalism are told
390:. The subject gets some google hits, but most of them seem to be products of his own self-promotion. I can't find a single article in a reliable source. Even eviscerating to a stub isn't very feasible - there still needs to be an indication of
351:
for this article. A lot of articles survive AfDs because there's a consensus that the subject is notable despite the fact that the formalities of our notability requirements are not met. I'm quite ambivalent on this issue.
323:, hence the reason I'm not convinced of notability) of hits on g-news (search all dates) and g-scholar (plus a huge number of google and g-video hits) seem to confirm what was in the old revision.
516:
542:
394:
the subject is notable, and simply stating that he is an evangelist won't be adequate. If someone can find better sources than I could, I would reconsider my !vote.
588:, comic-book heroes, and such recent mythologies are "evil", and sometimes turn to these kinds of materials as an alternative. I can't cite that, since it'd break
119:
386:, for a few reasons. None of the references in the article can truly be considered a "high-quality reference", something explicitly called for in
86:
81:
90:
448:- If only his sources say he is what he is, and no one else can verify, and his books are nominal, he isn't notable. And for futhur comment,
332:
73:
216:
you mention, its more our concern that he actually did the things he says he did. No one other than his own people confirm it and it's
17:
417:
He is being used as an expert in a couple documentaries of the conspiracy genre that I am aware of, namely the anti-masonic
601:
575:
557:
531:
500:
461:
436:
408:
378:
361:
336:
309:
279:
253:
229:
196:
176:
155:
133:
55:
616:
571:
566:
Schnoebelen is a non-notable evangelist. The problem is there is no reliable source that suggests he is notable.
328:
36:
615:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
592:.) I'd like there to be something objective about him on Knowledge; silence speaks too much in his favor, IMO.
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
77:
305:
287:
To be honest, I thought that the {{fact}} tags made a fair enough point -- perhaps a little overzealous but
187:
should not be a concern because
Scnoebelen openly admits to his checkered past in his books and lectures. --
69:
61:
553:
527:
496:
457:
403:
374:
225:
469:
There are also sources from Chick
Publications (Jack Chick) & Saints Alive Ministry (Ed Decker). --
450:
i will not be alledged to have acted in bad faith when I placed the fact tags that needed to be placed
567:
491:- Two organizations which he works for or has worked for, and Chick Publications is hardly reliable.
324:
248:
128:
474:
275:
192:
172:
151:
597:
301:
142:
I've heard of this guy, he's written 6 books that I'm aware of and frequently gives lectures for
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
549:
523:
492:
453:
395:
370:
221:
470:
432:
423:
357:
271:
188:
168:
147:
593:
387:
292:
288:
184:
589:
348:
319:
Not sure about the notability, but I don't agree with the BLP stubbing. A handful (
107:
345:
163:
After looking through the article's history I've noticed that you deleted about
48:
428:
353:
344:
I think it is rather clear that it has been so far impossible to provide
295:
as a matter of legal responsibility. Having said that, my vote is to
609:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
164:
114:
103:
99:
95:
212:RucasHost, I don't think its our concern about his
517:list of Living people-related deletion discussions
543:list of Christianity-related deletion discussions
266:point out that there are articles on this man on
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
619:). No further edits should be made to this page.
146:. I'm sure some good references can be found. --
8:
300:not formal enough to establish much else.
247:That's fine, but it'd need to be sourced.
541:: This debate has been included in the
515:: This debate has been included in the
419:Secret Mysteries of America's Beginnings
291:. Remember that we do have to adhere to
369:. Evangelist of no known notability.
7:
24:
421:and the anti-Mormon documentary
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
165:80% of the articles content
636:
612:Please do not modify it.
602:16:52, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
56:00:35, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
32:Please do not modify it.
576:03:45, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
558:01:57, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
532:01:57, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
501:16:08, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
462:03:00, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
437:13:53, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
409:18:18, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
379:13:10, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
362:04:09, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
337:03:49, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
310:03:53, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
280:03:28, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
254:15:08, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
230:19:27, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
197:03:12, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
177:03:10, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
156:03:05, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
134:00:22, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
586:The Lord of the Rings
270:other Wikipedias. --
70:William Schnoebelen
62:William Schnoebelen
218:extremely unlikely
44:The result was
560:
546:
534:
520:
144:The Prophecy Club
627:
614:
547:
537:
521:
511:
406:
400:
349:reliable sources
289:not in bad faith
117:
111:
93:
53:
34:
635:
634:
630:
629:
628:
626:
625:
624:
623:
617:deletion review
610:
568:Masterpiece2000
404:
396:
325:JeremyMcCracken
113:
84:
68:
65:
49:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
633:
631:
622:
621:
605:
604:
578:
561:
535:
508:
507:
506:
505:
504:
503:
481:
480:
479:
478:
442:
441:
440:
439:
424:The God Makers
412:
411:
381:
364:
339:
314:
313:
312:
260:
259:
258:
257:
256:
237:
236:
235:
234:
233:
232:
214:checkered past
202:
201:
200:
199:
158:
124:
123:
64:
59:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
632:
620:
618:
613:
607:
606:
603:
599:
595:
591:
587:
582:
579:
577:
573:
569:
565:
562:
559:
555:
551:
544:
540:
536:
533:
529:
525:
518:
514:
510:
509:
502:
498:
494:
490:
487:
486:
485:
484:
483:
482:
476:
472:
468:
465:
464:
463:
459:
455:
451:
447:
444:
443:
438:
434:
430:
426:
425:
420:
416:
415:
414:
413:
410:
407:
401:
399:
393:
389:
385:
382:
380:
376:
372:
368:
365:
363:
359:
355:
350:
347:
343:
340:
338:
334:
330:
326:
322:
318:
315:
311:
307:
303:
302:BreathingMeat
298:
294:
290:
286:
283:
282:
281:
277:
273:
269:
264:
261:
255:
252:
251:
246:
243:
242:
241:
240:
239:
238:
231:
227:
223:
219:
215:
211:
208:
207:
206:
205:
204:
203:
198:
194:
190:
186:
183:
180:
179:
178:
174:
170:
166:
162:
159:
157:
153:
149:
145:
141:
138:
137:
136:
135:
132:
131:
121:
116:
109:
105:
101:
97:
92:
88:
83:
79:
75:
71:
67:
66:
63:
60:
58:
57:
54:
52:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
611:
608:
585:
580:
563:
538:
512:
488:
466:
449:
445:
422:
418:
397:
391:
383:
366:
341:
320:
316:
296:
284:
267:
262:
249:
244:
217:
213:
209:
181:
160:
143:
139:
129:
125:
50:
45:
43:
31:
28:
550:Fabrictramp
524:Fabrictramp
371:KleenupKrew
346:verifiable
250:Black Kite
130:Black Kite
471:RucasHost
272:RucasHost
220:at best.
189:RucasHost
169:RucasHost
148:RucasHost
594:Zephyrad
333:contribs
120:View log
489:Comment
467:Comment
342:Comment
321:handful
317:Comment
285:Comment
263:Comment
245:Comment
210:Comment
182:Comment
161:Comment
87:protect
82:history
564:Delete
493:Hooper
454:Hooper
446:Delete
388:WP:BLP
384:Delete
367:Delete
293:WP:BLP
222:Hooper
185:WP:BLP
115:delete
91:delete
46:Delete
590:WP:OR
118:) – (
108:views
100:watch
96:links
51:Nakon
16:<
598:talk
581:Keep
572:talk
554:talk
539:Note
528:talk
513:Note
497:talk
475:talk
458:talk
433:talk
429:meco
427:. __
375:talk
358:talk
354:meco
329:talk
306:talk
297:Keep
276:talk
268:four
226:talk
193:talk
173:talk
167:. --
152:talk
140:Keep
104:logs
78:talk
74:edit
548:--
545:.
522:--
519:.
452:.
402:|
398:Tan
392:why
331:) (
600:)
574:)
556:)
530:)
499:)
460:)
435:)
405:39
377:)
360:)
352:__
335:)
308:)
278:)
228:)
195:)
175:)
154:)
106:|
102:|
98:|
94:|
89:|
85:|
80:|
76:|
596:(
570:(
552:(
526:(
495:(
477:)
473:(
456:(
431:(
373:(
356:(
327:(
304:(
274:(
224:(
191:(
171:(
150:(
122:)
112:(
110:)
72:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.