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 and move to Unification Church antisemitism controversy Improvements by Dufour seem to meet WP:RS. Cheers, I'^mperator 18:57, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unification Church and antisemitism (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

This article is entirely WP:Original research. No reliable secondary sources are cited to show that this is even a notable topic. Primary sources are cited but not in a way that meets WP's standards. Borock (talk) 00:17, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. -- –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:20, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete sure looks like original research to me, too. Might also violate neutral point of view. Anyone?--Paul McDonald (talk) 02:49, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I agree with Paul McDonald Christiansocialism (talk) 04:58, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Original research and violates NPOV --DizFreak ^{talk Contributions} 09:10, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep It was certainly an important topic 5 years ago, even if it's poorly documented. Aren't there enough sources for the claim that the church is anti-semitic? Isn't anti-Semitism important? I don't understand why people want to eliminate this topic instead of improving the article. Anyway, another contributor recently announced plans to merge the information into Unification Church. Please let him do this, and leave a redirect behind. --Uncle Ed (talk) 10:20, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I was the one who suggested the article be merged, but to Divine Principle and that didn't seem to work. This is a real topic. I am a church member and once in a while I meet someone who is shocked to find out that I don't hate Jewish people (quite to the contrary actually). I don't know why the article is so poorly sourced but that could be improved. It might also be retitled to something like "Unification Church antisemitism controversy" or something like that. Steve Dufour (talk) 15:16, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - references seem to establish notability of the topic. Whether the article should or should not be merged, and whether it needs improvement, are essentially irrelevant to this discussion. John Carter (talk) 15:28, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete; this is original research via synthesis and a NPOV violation. *** Crotalus *** 21:06, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I have added a couple of better sources to the article. I hope this at least shows the notability of the topic. Steve Dufour (talk) 16:30, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and rename per Steve Dufour. I think the notability is now established by the ref. Europe22 (talk) 18:52, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:28, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep and rename to Unification Church antisemitism controversy per Steve Dufour and the recent additions.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 00:36, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per the improvements above. MuZemike 06:20, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep It should be merged provided that the non-cited information regarded as OR is referenced. ClockSpire (talk) 15:31, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep seems to meet notability requirements. May need to merged, however, if it can't be expanded. carl bunderson (talk) (contributions) 19:54, 30 July 2009 (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.