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 keep. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{(have a chat)} 08:24, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Big Easy Metropolitan Community Church[edit]

Big Easy Metropolitan Community Church (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Article is on a non-notable congregation. Google search shows that the it fails WP:GNG. The congregation is not tied to a Church so there is no architectural notability in that regard.  Ryan Vesey 02:11, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Question Do you mean that the church doesn't have its own building? Nyttend (talk) 03:07, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think the distinction is that it is a Church (a congregation of people who worship together), but not a Church-building like Notre Dame de Paris. This Church congregation meets in a community centre. If the article was about a congregation and their building (with the same name) then it would have to be considered against notability guidelines in both contexts, eg. WP:NPLACE and WP:GROUP, in case it met either. At least I think that's what's going on. Stalwart111 (talk) 03:21, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Correct and I apologize for the confusion. I knew what I was thinking but not how to say it. Many congregations are not notable; however, the church building is notable (for architectural or other reasons). Most discussions of this sort would come down to the notability of the building. In this case, the church "has not held a dedicated edifice for the majority of its history". Ryan Vesey 03:47, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, they meet in a community centre also used by a couple of other churches. Most of them moved there from other buildings damaged or destroyed by Hurricane Katrina. There are plenty of mentions in blogs, travel guides and the like, but not in reliable sources. Stalwart111 (talk) 03:56, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as failing WP:GNG. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 06:41, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 15:10, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 15:10, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 15:10, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Louisiana-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 15:10, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - per nom, not notable. ukexpat (talk) 17:43, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong keep. I had no problems finding reliable sources which is easier in the light of searching under "Metropolitan Community Church" and "New Orleans" rather than the link at the top of this page. This also represents the organization's new name per the group's own website "The members of our congregation met on January 22, 2012 and voted to change the name to the Metropolitan Community Church of New Orleans, to solidify our devotion to the beautiful and dynamic city we call home." A LGBT-welcoming church in the Deep South that's been around for decades is guaranteed to generate news and controversy. Even a good portion of the fire reporting covered the church as well. Insomesia (talk) 20:36, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL has some but there are better search engines available. Insomesia (talk) 20:36, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've followed the link you provided. Can you provide some of the reliable sources you have found? Ryan Vesey 20:39, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'll work on it. If it looks involved I may just add them into the article. Insomesia (talk) 21:00, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • I have to step out but will add more. Of note is 15-20 articles in The Advocate which I have to go through Google Books to see. Will add appropriate ones as I get to them. Insomesia (talk) 00:08, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

*Merge and redirect to UpStairs Lounge arson attack for reasons that are clear from reading both articles. Since this apparently notable incident (of which I had never heard before) took place in conjunction with the lounge's use as the home for the church, it would be reasonable to include something about the church's subsequent history and renaming in the article about the incident. Another candidate for merger-redirection would be Metropolitan Community Church of which this church apparently is a local affiliate. Neutron (talk) 21:12, 28 September 2012 (UTC) Stricken per subsequent changes to article, now keep. Neutron (talk) 23:20, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. Article pretty much rewritten, and sources added. I'm still finding more as the search churns different (and too broad) results when just doing MCC and "New Orleans". Obviously we're missing anything that doesn't include those but I think that gets more of the national news items. Presently I'm in the first pages of 200+ book search but will add appropriate ones as I find them. Insomesia (talk) 02:15, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Obvious Keep - I understand why the article was nominated, but since the article was expanded, there is clear and abundant notability. Here are some additional references:

– MrX 13:00, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - Now, obviously meets WP:GNG from the article itself. Comment - If the tone of the Wikipedia article reflect a summary of the reliable sources, fine. But the article presents this Church as nothing more than a victim that continues to strive and overcome attacks and use its past victimization as a platform on which to grow. I don't think the people attending the church go there to become a group for others to attack or to sit there each week to listen to the preacher reminisce about the forty-year ago UpStairs Lounge arson attack or how the next attack is just around the corner. The topic is not Attacks on the Big Easy Metropolitan Community Church. The topic is the Big Easy Metropolitan Community Church congregation and if you want to write about them as a group, it should be less about others attacks on the group and more about the group itself. Others actions do not define the group, the group's actions define it and that is how the article should flow. It's website says it was "founded by Rev Troy Perry in 1967 to proclaim God's love and redemption to those who had previously been denied a place in Christ's church." The Wikipedia article isn't even close to that and instead is all about victimization. Also, the term "Church" in the article name usually is reserved for a building structure within which the congregation worships. I suggest moving the article to something like New Orleans Metropolitan Community Church congregation[1] since they appearantly do not have an notable building like those listed at GA-Class churches. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 15:09, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You make some good points. However, the word church has implicit meaning as congregation. As examples, we have Catholic Church, First Unitarian Church of Honolulu and Presbyterian Church of Wales. – MrX 15:53, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

But both of those are refering to a larger body. Metropolitan Community Church is a church, and there is a church on the corner next to my house. In this case, there is no building (the latter) and this congregation is much smaller than the former. Even note the article for MCC, which says "many local MCC congregations". Ryan Vesey 15:57, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I concede that the MCC is a small church, and even smaller on a local level. I would point out though that the first Christian church didn't have a building and had only about a dozen members. – MrX 16:14, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Many if not most churches start out not owning their own building. Part of this churches history is that they have had to rent and borrow for much of their history due to arson and natural disasters. That doesn't mean the name of the article should not reflect who there are or be saddled with some qualifier that they don't own a building. They simply are doing their business in a shared space. Once this discussion is over the article should be moved to Metropolitan Community Church of Greater New Orleans, the name the congregation has chosen for itself. Insomesia (talk) 22:58, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete or Merge/redirect to UpStairs Lounge arson attack. The point here isn't how many members the church has, or whether it has a building. The point is whether it has received significant coverage from multiple reliable sources. Based on the sources in the article, I would have to say that this church has not. Most of the sources provided are from special interest publications such as The Advocate and Ambush Magazine. The mainstream sources provided are either dead links or else are about something else (e.g. Hurricane Katrina). BTW I was living in New Orleans at the time of the fire and it was reported entirely as an attack on a bar or lounge; I can't remember any of the coverage ever mentioning a church. --MelanieN (talk) 22:42, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • The sourcing disagrees with your assessment. And LGBT sources are often considered reliable, especially in the context that they are used here. The Advocate is a well-respected national news magazine, for instance. Insomesia (talk) 23:31, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Obvious Keep, sourced. --Nouniquenames 04:20, 7 October 2012 (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.