Korea Jesus Presbyterian Church

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

No notability or SIGCOV; Wikipedia is not a directory. Article created 12 years ago but the only reference in it is an address database entry. Northern Moonlight 16:32, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Christianity and South Korea. Shellwood (talk) 16:44, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following related pages for the same reason, note that they were created by the same editor:

All prior XfDs for this page: Articles for deletion/Presbyterian Church in Korea (YeJangHapBo)

I am aware that I’m supposed to put ((afd1)) on top of each article, but given the extraordinary amount of them, I’d like some help. Northern Moonlight 16:51, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nowadays all these would not have survived the NPP. So Delete all, whether marked or unmarked by the nominator. --Викидим (talk) 17:48, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DELETE ALL - ~~All of these are socks created by a now blocked user. Please see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Cryx88/Archive.~~ — Maile (talk) 19:01, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Maile66: What do you mean? As far as I can tell, these articles were all created by Cryx88 (who hadn't yet been blocked under any account), so I don't see how sockpuppetry is relevant. jlwoodwa (talk) 19:09, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I see your point. I'm still for deleting all entries, but for the reason stated in this nomination. These were created from someone using an online data base, setting up individual articles from what amounts to a one-line reference info therein for each individual church. — Maile (talk) 19:45, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:04, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All 67 articles have now been tagged with ((subst:afd)). jlwoodwa (talk) 19:04, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

- Comment Unless these were created by a sockpuppet of a blocked editor I don't think any of these should be deleted before there is some evidence of a WP:BEFORE by the nominator or other editors. Also a number of these have an additional reference or two as well as the address database such as the one linked in the previous AfD which was no consensus, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 19:16, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. None of these articles is backed up by independent sourcing. Cortador (talk) 20:05, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Presbyterian Church in Korea has an independent source and so do others. Anyway what is important is whether independent sources exist not whether they are already used in the articles, Atlantic306 (talk) 20:17, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This AfD does not include Presbyterian Church in Korea. Northern Moonlight 20:21, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry the title is Presbyterian Church in Korea (YeJangHapBo), Atlantic306 (talk) 20:25, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That is, at the very most, a single source for a single article, ignoring reliability and independence for a moment. I don't see sufficient independent coverage here. If you believe that other independent and reliable sourcing exists for these articles (all, or nay number, really), you are free to contribute them here. Cortador (talk) 20:56, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is most likely not an independent article, it reads like a press release. Викидим (talk) 21:26, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The onus is on the nominator to conduct WP:BEFORE on all nominated articles, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 20:59, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Redirect.~~ The page creator had a track record of creating articles on every single obscure reformed denomination regardless of notability before his block, often using highly unreliable sources. The source used in almost all of these, http://www.reformiert-online.net/, is WP:USERGENERATED ("reformed online does not accept any responsibility for the correctness and completeness of the information."). However, some of what's on it appears to be based on a standard reference work by Bauswein and Vischer, and you can see all these denominations in this AfD listed on pages 297 to 334. So, these denominations exist (or did at one point), but I can't find any WP:SIGCOV, in English anyway, beyond a description in Bauswein and Vischer. I recommend redirecting each one that doesn't pass WP:NORG to Presbyterianism in South Korea, which may well be all of them. Dclemens1971 (talk) 21:28, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all. Some of the denominations might be notable, no bias against re-creation if there are sources beyond reformiert-online. But right now, none of these meet the minimum requirements for sourcing or verifiability; I'm not certain some of them ever existed. Walsh90210 (talk) 22:36, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Obviously a majority of these exist. But the sourcing is poor enough I would not be surprised if a few errors crept in. Presbyterian Church in Korea (HoHun II) (which probably should be listed) and Presbyterian Church in Korea (HoHun III) have sources for the other name; as both articles say almost nothing it isn't terribly important. Are the "II" and "III" distinctions just the creation of reformiert? I don't know. There isn't enough for many of these articles to remain even as a redirect. Walsh90210 (talk) 17:30, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They exist (or existed); see the standard reference work (Bauswein and Vischer, The Reformed Family Worldwide) here: https://archive.org/details/reformedfamilywo0000unse/. I sincerely doubt that most of them would pass WP:GNG, but a redirect would preserve the history should other editors be able to resurrect them with reliable sourcing. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:37, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose mass deletion. Per Atlantic306's comment, the onus is on the nominator to research before nominating for deletion. Per WP:SIGCOV, any language source should count; I strongly doubt anyone here searched in the Korean language. I'm nearly certain at least one of those branches will be notable. Heads up that I am South Korean and a Korean speaker, and I have no reason to suspect that some of the organizations have never existed per Walsh90210's claim. The Presbyterian church is infamously fractured in South Korea; it is the subject of scholarly research in the country, and Christian newspapers regularly cover their drama. There are hundreds of these splinter groups, some of which are more notable than others (most aren't, I suspect). seefooddiet (talk) 07:45, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't recall which one it was, but I successfully defended one such article (may or may not be in this list) from deletion a few months ago. It may or may not be in this list. But if I've saved at least one of these articles in the past, it's probable that I can do it again. I don't think a mass deletion is appropriate. seefooddiet (talk) 07:48, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BEFORE recommended me to check interlingual links: I don’t think any of them is notable to have a corresponding article on kowiki either. Note that one Korean language source you cited in a previous AfD deals exclusively with the change in personnel and falls under ORGTRIV. Northern Moonlight 10:42, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Could you link the prev AFD? seefooddiet (talk) 17:04, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok nvm I found it, it's the one for YeJangHapBo. Also this source, from the major The Chosun Ilbo, is substantial on YeJangHapBo. If anything this just cements my point: making these broad claims about the kowiki and notability is not enough. Each one needs to be researched. Continue to strong oppose. seefooddiet (talk) 18:30, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Are you sure the source you cited is actually substantial on YeJangHapBo? Northern Moonlight 18:45, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
?? Is this a facetious question? Do you have a different perception of it? Moreover, even if you find a crack in this one source, the fact that we're even debating this topic is not helpful to your overall cause. The takeaway should be that it's not 100% clear that every one of these nominations will be valid. Neither you or I know for certain the notability of all of these pages, therefore we should abstain from mass deletion. seefooddiet (talk) 19:10, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can you not just assume good faith once in this thread? I read your source. Can you point to a sentence in the article that isn’t “X exists”? Northern Moonlight 22:02, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It usually pays off to be nicer to one's colleagues. Anyhow, I failed to find in this source anything resembling WP:SIGCOV. Викидим (talk) 22:38, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Northern Moonlight Ok, egg on my face and full apology. I'm sorry. It wasn't my intent in this thread to be rude but reading it back I can see how it came off that way. I'm also not sure if that source genuinely is substantial enough, you made the correct call.

What I do stand by is that normally we should investigate each branch before this kind of mass deletion. seefooddiet (talk) 23:05, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Reluctant oppose. I don't really care for these, but it's evident BEFORE has not been done, and seefooddiet has good points that it's likely some of these are notable. --JFHutson (talk) 18:42, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Why not merge all of them into a separate article, perhaps something like List of branches of the Presbyterian Church of Korea? -- 00101984hjw (talk) 22:21, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Or perhaps even the Presbyterian Church of Korea article itself. I might work more on expanding that one, but since most of the aforementioned AfDs are only a paragraph long or so it'll probably fit in WP:TOOLONG -- 00101984hjw (talk) 22:27, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Articles can not be merged to a non-existent article. So, some editor has to at least start creating this target article. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:34, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That list already exists at Presbyterianism_in_South_Korea#Korean_Presbyterian_denominations, to which I have suggested redirects above. Dclemens1971 (talk) 12:01, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Currently, there are at least more than 200 churches in South Korea that use the name "Presbyterian Church of Korea" (대한예수장로회) as their official names (hence the confusing article names). These church branches are only disambiguated by a succinct nickname, such as "Hapdong", "Tonghap", or "Hapdongbosu" (although they may use different names in English, like Hapdong, for instance). According to some sources it appears that there are four major lineages of PCK branches: Koshin(branched off from the original PCK in 1952), Kijang(branched off in 1957), Tonghap and Hapdong (the original PCK split into these two in 1959). The rest of the branches have descended from the four after 1959. [1][2] Since none of the four major branches have been listed for AfD, would it be possible to merge each AfD'd article to one of the four major branches, depending on where they descended from? -- 00101984hjw (talk) 03:42, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural keep. Too massive nomination. The amount of work to verify every church's notability in Korean sources is beyond what can be reasonably (let alone fairly) expected from competent and willing users. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 00:41, 26 August 2024 (UTC)Thank you.[reply]
Procedural keep: I don't support deleting 60+ articles on the presumption that they maybe aren't notable. No research at all has been done for most of the articles. If even one or two are notable then we have made a mistake. C F A 💬 19:44, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural keep: I already believed these should not be deleted, and now I am convinced by other editors that redirecting is not the best approach with a nomination of this volume. However, I would ask the closer to close this with WP:NPASR and/or with no prejudice against WP:BLARing any of these where appropriate and where editors cannot find appropriate sources. My recommendation for after this closes is either to redirect the majority of these to Presbyterianism in South Korea or to, as 00101984hjw, a list article yet to be created; this can be accomplished through WP:BOLD mergers and redirection or through proposed mergers if controversial, with (hopefully) no need to return to AfD. Dclemens1971 (talk) 13:32, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I don't see a consensus here and this is beginning to look like a TRAINWRECK.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:14, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete (almost) all. Keep or redirect some to Presbyterian Church of Korea, if they have at least three reliable sources. I would keep those churches that meet my standards. Bearian (talk) 01:17, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]