Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Lynn (pastor)

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 delete. Nakon 03:22, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

David Lynn (pastor) (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)

Blatantly promotional piece for a non-notable dude. As even the user who removed the PROD pointed out, the secondary sources are low-quality and/or actually affiliated with the subject. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 15:33, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:30, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:30, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:30, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: The promotional nature of the article doesn't really have a bearing on this discussion; the key issue is notability, and in particular, whether he is notable for more than just one event. StAnselm (talk) 22:46, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment -- I see this man as a relatively NN street preacher: such people are not that uncommon. The only ground I could see for this being kept is if his case should become a cause celebre, as to police interference with freedom of speech or religious freedom. I do not read the Canadian media, and so do not know. Peterkingiron (talk) 20:11, 13 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, this happened several months ago and nothing has come of it, neither coverage nor cause-celebre status... –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 20:14, 13 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Apparently the promotional stuff got removed; it's not promotional now. What it is is just media coverage from when he's in the news. We need secondary sources. Restore once he's getting covered in books, or once the news media start providing significant retrospective coverage of the guy. Nyttend (talk) 14:27, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Despite his best efforts at making a homophobic scene of himself, he has not appeared in any reliable sources. Delete. Bearian (talk) 01:56, 28 February 2015 (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.