Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 08:10, 12 January 2020

Methodist Churches in Leicester

New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Methodist Churches in Leicester (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)

NOTE: Methodist Churches in Leicester has been moved to Methodist churches in Leicester per MOS:AT

There's a category for this, and most of these would not meet WP:NOTE. I feel it does not serve a purpose. Jerod Lycett (talk) 11:25, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Jerod Lycett (talk) 11:25, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. North America 11:33, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. North America 11:33, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 13:12, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

• That there's a corresponding category is not an argument for deletion, but the category only contains two entries apart from this list. So if this were to be pruned to only include entries with articles, it would not have enough content to merit a standalone list. Redirecting to Places of worship in Leicester might be a good option. postdlf (talk) 14:47, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:NOTDIR and WP:LISTN. Almost every entry is non-notable. Ajf773 (talk) 18:40, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Comment the above cited WP:LISTN states:

There is no present consensus for how to assess the notability of more complex and cross-categorization lists (such as "Lists of X of Y") or what other criteria may justify the notability of stand-alone lists, although non-encyclopedic cross-categorizations are touched upon in Misplaced Pages:What Misplaced Pages is not. Lists that fulfill recognized informational, navigation, or development purposes often are kept regardless of any demonstrated notability. Editors are still urged to demonstrate list notability via the grouping itself before creating stand-alone lists.Djflem (talk) 21:35, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

In this case there is no demonstrated notability, Misplaced Pages is not intended to be a list of every little thing. Ajf773 (talk) 21:57, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style/Lists#Purposes of lists and Misplaced Pages:CSC cite other considerations.Djflem (talk) 22:55, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

But the topic of "Methodist churches" is clearly valid in the world, and it is reasonable to have a List of Methodist churches (which we do have) and for editors to exercise editorial discretion in splitting it out geographically as seems necessary to keep the size of list down. However, the overall list is not too large, since the United States section was split out a long time ago, and it is feasible and reasonable to cover Methodist churches of Leicester in the main list-article's section on the United Kingdom. So i !vote "Merge" below. About the list-item significance of each separate church, i.e. whether it should be mentioned, that is a question for editors involved in developing/maintaining the world-wide list-article. In discussion at its Talk page, they can decide if they want to limit the list to just places proven already to be individually Misplaced Pages-notable or to allow other items that seem significant and head off creation of separate articles for each one. That is how this is supposed to work. I don't see any relevance of discussion about "Lists of X of Y", that is not what is happening here. --Doncram (talk) 22:32, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

• Keep & Rename or Merge List of Methodist churches in Leicester Djflem (talk) 21:38, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

• Merge or redirect. This is a list of Methodist churches in one area of England, which does not have a lot of useful information for readers. But the topic is clearly within the domain of List of Methodist churches#United Kingdom. Any useful content/sources should be merged to there. We are obligated to look for wp:ATD Alternatives to Deletion and this is a good one available here. --Doncram (talk) 22:25, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Comment:seems a rather long list to incorporate into target, but not opposed.Djflem (talk) 22:58, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

• Comment: The deletion nominator states "There's a category for this, ..." as part of why they feel it "does not serve a purpose." The nominator appears to be unaware of wp:CLNT about how lists and categories (and navigation templates) are complementary. Usually, if there is a category then there can be a list. The list can cite sources, include photos, include coordinates and show maps, and otherwise provide substantial information that a category cannot. It also can be extremely useful by including redlinks for items that should have articles (as supported by sources establishing significance) and by including "blacklink" coverage of items that are somewhat significant and can be covered in the list without having to create separate articles about them, thereby heading off article creation. Categories cannot do that; they seem to demand more creation of articles. Here, about Methodist churches in Leicester there should be and is a corresponding list-article already at a higher level. The Leicester category is useful, though, for bringing our attention to at least two Methodist churches not yet covered in the List of Methodist churches in England list. Going forward, Jerod Lycett, please do read and try to understand wp:CLNT. --Doncram (talk) 03:39, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:LISTOUTCOMES also speaks to this. Djflem (talk) 19:37, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

The fact that we have a category means it's not useful for tracking, and given that the vast majority of the list is not notable means the list itself has to serve a purpose. Leicseter has not had an effect on Methodism, and Methodism has not had an effect on Leicsester. I should have stated this more clearly, but since WP:NOTDIR, this also sets a precedent of having tens of thousands of "List of {sect/denomination} {religious buildings} in {municipality/region}". I will say here, I support the idea to Merge it, but I don't think it's what Misplaced Pages is about to have lists like this. If a place or sect had an influence on the other (strong ties) then I could see listing it out like this. Jerod Lycett (talk) 11:23, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

There is not a corresponding category. The Category:Methodist churches in Leicestershire is for churches in the county of Leicestershire, not for churches in Leicester. Neither of the two churches currently in the category are in the city of Leicester. There is no Category:Methodist churches in Leicester because we don't have any articles on such churches.----Pontificalibus 09:37, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, i wondered about that myself, whether those churches were in Leicester proper or elsewhere in Leicestershire. Whatever, it still makes sense to add those two to the List of Methodist churches and to merge/redirect the AFD subject. --Doncram (talk) 23:13, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

• Rename (as suggested) but better Delete -- At one stage in WP's development, lists with redlinks provided a useful means of identifying where articles were needed, but that time has passed. However, the general consensus is that most local churches are NN, so that converting the list to redlinks would invite articles on NN churches, which would then have to go through AFD. I am sure the Methodist Church will have a website that will list all its churches; and they will update it as churches close and (less often) open. A list such as this has a grave risk of ceasing to be correct if not maintained. Note: Castle Donnington is in Leicestershire (but not Leicester). Peterkingiron (talk) 17:12, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

No one is saying that the list should be converted to redlinks. Maybe your perspective comes down to "redirect" rather than "merge" because you might think that there is no content worth merging (besides the two bluelink ones i added, which are apparently elsewhere in Leicestershire). Either way leaves a redirect. --Doncram (talk) 23:13, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

• Keep Methodist Churches in Leicester is a notable topic. However List of Methodist Churches in Leicester would violate WP:NOTDIRECTORY while we have no articles on individual churches. The article should be improved to describe the churches, not merely list them.----Pontificalibus 09:44, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

I am not opposed to changing it from a list to a regular article, and would support the keep in that case. Jerod Lycett (talk) 11:52, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

NOT in violation of above mentioned WP:NOTDIRECTORY that clearly states:Of course, there is nothing wrong with having lists if their entries are relevant because they are associated with or significantly contribute to the list topic, which this article list clearly does.Djflem (talk) 17:39, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Nope, the article as it stands is a clear violation of #7 "Simple listings". You are quoting the part of the policy that is applicable only to lists of associated topics, such as quotations.----Pontificalibus 18:14, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

In other words, a opening explanation providing context information as cited in #7 - Simple listings without context information - would resolve the issue. Yes, an introductory first paragraph would be good, but its current lack speaks to the state of the article (Misplaced Pages:UGLY) not the validity of it. Djflem (talk) 22:25, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

• Keep and expand with referenced content and prose, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 16:14, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
• Comment: Honestly I don't see enough material available to justify having a separate article about Methodism in Leicester. Methodism is not even mentioned in the Leicester article, which does cover the building of a cathedral and some other stuff about other churches which were important in Leicester. The "notable topic" source identified by Pontificalibus does assert that John Wesley came to Leicester in 1853 to preach, came again in 1857, preached in 1893, and came again in 1894, but didn't he visit lots of places? I did use the source to develop a bit about the Millstone Lane site in the article. Perhaps a sentence or two can be added to sort of "describe" one or a few more, but there is no content about architecture or anything much. The source is mainly a prose list of churches, like in other sections it is a prose list about churches of other denominations. I currently think the Millstone Lane item is worth merging over to the main List of Methodist churches article, but probably not much more. If more information comes available and the sublist of Methodist churches in Leicester is greatly expanded within the main list, it could conceivably be split back out again in the future, but I don't think that is likely any time soon. !Votes to "keep and expand with prose" assume there are both sources and editor interest not apparent. --Doncram (talk) 23:42, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

• Merge to List of Methodist churches#United Kingdom: Unless someone goes ahead and rewrites the article into a separate article about Methodism in Leicester, this article should be considered as a list of Methodist churches in Leicester. There are only two notable entries in the list and I don't see how the list really fulfills any of the three main roles in WP:LISTPURP separately from the overarching list - only very weak cases could be made for any of the three. It's also not convincing that "Methodist churches in Leicester" is notable as a whole (as opposed to "Methodism in Leicester"). — MarkH₂₁ 08:10, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

• AfD debates (Places and transportation)
• AfD debates