Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Christianity

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Christianity. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Christianity|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Christianity. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Christianity/archive

Purge page cache

watch

Christianity

Paurastya Vidyapitham

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

Does not have enough secondary references to merit an article. Fails notability. - The9Man ^Talk 06:38, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. - The9Man ^Talk 06:38, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Christianity, and India. Shellwood (talk) 09:41, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Degree granting seminary/graduate institution are presumptively notable per
WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES. That's been watered down lately, but no BEFORE has been articulated and the nomination rationale runs counter to NEXIST, so I'm not convinced. Jclemens (talk) 22:51, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply
]

Saint John the Baptist Elementary School, Pittston

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

The page does not have any reliable sources that significantly cover it. There are some YouTube videos about it, but those are not reliable and likely not secondary. Using Google news, you can find some news articles that show up. However, these articles only cover people who are associated with the school and not the school itself, thereby failing

WP:SIGCOV. The school has closed, so this isn't likely to change in the future. Easternsahara (talk) 20:05, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, Christianity, and Pennsylvania. Shellwood (talk) 20:10, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sources:
- Area Parochial School Crunch Appeal To Bishop: Keep Schools Open St. John The Baptist And St. Mary’s Are Set To Close. Scores Turn Out To Protest (2004)[1]
- "Exclusive: Catholic teachers offer plan: Union group wants to prevent layoffs that might result from diocese reorganization study." (2006)[2]
- "Court dismisses petition to keep school open" (2004)[3]
- The Sisters of the I.H.M.[4]

This history is actually mentioned in Pittston, Pennsylvania with a "citation needed" flag, so a merge to Pittston, Pennsylvania#Education probably makes sense. 21:26, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

Merge selectively as suggested. Bearian (talk) 11:03, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Church of the Ascension of Christ in Warsaw

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

No evidence of notability, either in this article or the original in Polish. JohnMizuki (talk) 19:23, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture, Christianity, and Poland. Shellwood (talk) 19:34, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm having trouble searching in Polish, but it's an architecturally distinctive modern church - I'd be surprised if there's nothing on it beyond what's in the Polish article. SportingFlyer T·C 21:04, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WAYF

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

This repeater for the

BLARs). WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:44, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio, Christianity, and Florida. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:44, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I see a fair number of Google hits mentioning "WAY-FM", but no significant coverage. Being listed on some directory, random fan site, or streaming service does not establish notability. Donald Albury 14:29, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to WayFM Network There is no shot at standalone notability for this facility. Of the four early WayFM stations, the only two that have articles have them because they were sold on to other owners. If you are a repeater of a Christian radio network, sometimes even if you have limited local programming (and that's less common), there is often not enough material for GNG. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 23:18, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to
WP:GNG-worthy sourcing present here at all to establish its notability independently of the overall network regardless. Bearcat (talk) 15:24, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply
]

Noah Vivrette

Noah Vivrette (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I originally nominated this article for speedy deletion [5] which was turned down. I believe this article fails
WP:BEFORE again (as I did when I nominated for speedy and can't find anything that is reliable or substantive. The amount of followers doesn't confer notability. Knitsey (talk) 22:45, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Indiana-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:57, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:57, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:57, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:57, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:59, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: No coverage at all found in media, either using the person's name or Postman. Zero hits that aren't social media. Nearly all sources in the article are primary, with 19 being the only one that's even close, but it's not nearly enough. Zero hints of notability. Oaktree b (talk) 23:05, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
https://www.tiktok.com/@postmanforevermore He is a very prominent figure in the right wing scene on TikTok and Instagram. 2600:1700:36B0:2E30:1588:45F1:17EA:43DB (talk) 01:22, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We need media that talks about him, not simply the platform promoting the streamer. Oaktree b (talk) 01:27, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Subject does not pass
WP:GNG as TikTok cannot be considered a reliable source. The first source appears to be written by the subject and is not coverage. I can't find any references that are both reliable and independent. Nixleovel (He/They) (Talk • Contribs) 23:06, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply
]
No I'm not Postman. BlackpillEnthusiast77 (talk) 01:23, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You have to scroll down to February 2025 on ADL. It's mentioned in the reference. 2600:1700:36B0:2E30:1588:45F1:17EA:43DB (talk) 01:20, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You have to scroll down to February 2025 on ADL. It's mentioned in the reference. 2600:1700:36B0:2E30:1588:45F1:17EA:43DB (talk) 01:22, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That also appears a trivial mention. Oaktree b (talk) 01:28, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for pointing that out ip. Looking at that entry, I would agree with Oaktree that it is a passing mention. Knitsey (talk) 14:55, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The list of banned Tiktok accounts, as if that is noteworthy, encyclopedic material, sinks Wikipedia to new lows. - Poof positive (talk) 04:04, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Article subject fails
WP:RS. Zach^H007 16:09, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete per nom. KnowDeath (talk) 17:15, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete unless ACTUAL sources are found. The majority of the article has a "source" of TikTok, which is NOT a reliable source. Gatemansgc (TɅ̊LK) 02:45, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Vanguard Presbyterian Church

Vanguard Presbyterian Church (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Every source in this article which mentions the subject is either from the denomination itself, one of its churches, or Dewey Roberts, the convening moderator (i.e. founder). Regardless of the author of the Aquila Report articles, the Aquila Report itself probably doesn't qualify as reliable. This is a splinter denomination that hasn't received
WP:SIGCOV in reliable sources. I went looking for SIGCOV and did not find it. - JFHutson (talk) 01:24, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. JFHutson (talk) 01:24, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:16, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - tiny breakaway denomination with all of 27 clergy in 23 churches. Bearian (talk) 01:19, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Knights of the Holy Eucharist

Knights of the Holy Eucharist (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Doesn't seem to have any really independent sources, indicating a lack of
notability
.

First source: "The Knights paid a modest amount for the writing and promotion of this article"

Second source", journalist: "In addition to working with the Knights of the Holy Eucharist (knights.org)[...]"

Third source is informing that the bishop (head of the diocese) is working with the Knight

and so on, a mixture of seemingly unreliable partisan sources (Catholic Online), non-independent sources (EWTN), contact information, ...
This seems to be a local organisation of just 12 people in 2016[8], not some large organization spread across the US or multiple countries.
Fram (talk) 10:55, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Christianity, and Nebraska. Shellwood (talk) 12:26, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

weak keep: Most of the Catholic media would of course have an association with the org discussed here, but I'd still consider them independent, as they have editorial control over what they publish. Otherwise, I didn't find anything (sourcing seems to be only in religious/Catholic media). Oaktree b (talk) 13:21, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
But even within the Catholic media, which ones do you consider to have reliable, notable, independent coverage of this group? First three sources at least don't qualify, which ones do? Most seem to be from the diocese of Lincoln, which is the diocese working together with the Knights (see source 3).
Fram (talk) 13:39, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete as not notable (only 12 members are in the order), but with the caveat that Roman Catholic media is actually fairly reliable. Bearian (talk) 02:07, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Many of them are, e.g the Lincoln diocese one is reliable, just not independent in this case: but I only called out Catholic Online which seems to be some fringe outlet (feel free to correct me)
Fram (talk) 05:03, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:16, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Grace Baptist School (Portland, Maine)

Grace Baptist School (Portland, Maine) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Kept at AFD in 2008; apparently largely on the then-held basis that all schools are notable. Tagged as unsourced since 2018 and appears to have been generally unsourced since creation aside from linking to the school's website. This is not really significant coverage. There are other such brief descriptions in the newspapers.com archives of the
WP:NORG for a nonprofict private school based on brief annual newspaper announcements stating that the school had opened for the year and two brief passages in a book stating that the school had strict rules about hairstyles and that a "Let's get rowdy" cheer chant had been suppressed. The 2008 AFD included a reference to sources existing but none were produced. Hog Farm _Talk 05:16, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Christianity, and Maine. Hog Farm _Talk 05:16, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The first nomination was at
Grace Baptist School has pointed to Grace Baptist (then a dab page but now an article) ever since. (I note this for completeness; I have no opinion on the article or its sourcing, potential or otherwise.) WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:24, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:24, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I found 5 news articles related to the school's history, but did not find any sources describing its closure. I thin it's worth keeping as a record of an institution that served the community. — Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 03:03, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not quite convinced with the sources there. The first is not independent, the second is about the church and only briefly mentions the school, the third is a brief statement that two teachers from the school attended a curriculum screening, and then the remaining three are short pieces without bylines from the local paper, two of which appear to be primarily just restating what the administrator of the school said. If there were an article on the church I think this would be an obvious case for a merger, but there isn't. Hog Farm _Talk 16:43, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:02, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Corpus Christi Catholic Church, Wokingham

Corpus Christi Catholic Church, Wokingham (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Not seeing any independent
WP:BEFORE search turns up many more directory listings and trivial mentions (example) but nothing we can work with for notability. Open to a redirect to Roman Catholic Diocese of Portsmouth but bringing it to AfD for that consensus since a draftification was contested with the addition of non-qualifying sources. Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:14, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Christianity, and England. Dclemens1971 (talk) 19:14, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete as a run-of-the-mill parish. I wouldn't redirect to the diocese as there is no list of parishes. Mangoe (talk) 21:03, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

keep Many of the other churches in the diocese have a Wikipedia page, so I believe that it's only fair that this one does. There might not be too many references because it isn't a huge parish, but many other churches' Wikipedia pages have even worse referencing, it it is difficult to find relevant sources. But I believe that the sources are not biased and it does not compromise the quality of the article. Eterin (talk) 09:56, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please see
WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS -- it's not a valid argument to retain a page. If it's difficult to find sourcing for this topic then we should not keep it as a standalone mainspace page. Dclemens1971 (talk) 12:51, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Agent 007 (talk) 18:08, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Catholic theology on the body

Catholic theology on the body (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

This article is original research/synthesis through-and-through and has not substantially changed from its original form in 2008,
WP:ILIKEIT
, the original author of the article declaring his topic to be kept, and another who unfortunately simply did not understand that the content of the article is original research.
Speaking from my professional qualifications as a Catholic theologian: The term "theology of the body" (not "theology on the body", which appears to be a name a user made up moving the page in 2020 and sounds like bad English at best) refers properly to a series of addresses made by Pope John Paul II. The article identifies a grab bag of Patristic and medieval sources as proponents of a discrete "theology of the body" which they were collectively developing as opposed to being various sources—some of whom were close collaborators, such as Ambrose and Augustine, and some of whom were at odds—who at times spoke of issues that today may be called theological anthropology. The verifiability of the references has been unclear for years as the Talk page reveals.
It may be possible to invoke
WP:TNT here—I think it is possible to have an encyclopedic article on the history of Christian views of the human body—but as it is, this is original research, not a history of Christian anthropology. M.A.Spinn (talk) 03:26, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Religion and Christianity. M.A.Spinn (talk) 03:26, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I agree that this title is malformed, and further that I would expect JPII's writings to be the PRIMARYTOPIC here. So, maybe a redirection is in order? Jclemens (talk) 05:13, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There's already a separate article for JPII's writings. And of course, the difference is that the JPII article isn't original research and is about a notable topic with a body of secondary literature associated with it whereas the article I have nominated is a case of original research. Deleting and making a redirect to that article or even Christian anthropology may be appropriate. M.A.Spinn (talk) 13:59, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Seems to be some sort of SYNTH at work... The Church has various positions on the human body, but this doesn't seem to be related to that. Most of the opening paragraphs are unsourced, then go on quoting primary texts with sourcing. There's something here, as the Church has discussed the human body and how it should be viewed, but this doesn't seem to cover it. Oaktree b (talk) 14:24, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, starting with the lead, the first sentence is straight up wrong (no one outside of this article says "theology on the body") and furthermore the second sentence "The dogma of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary, defined in Pope Pius XII's 1950 apostolic constitution Munificentissimus Deus, is one of the most recent developments in the Catholic theology of the body" is simply nonsense (even if it were sourced!)—a doctrine happening to involve bodies does not make it "theology of the body." So the article taking a bunch of random sources and insisting they represent a consistent development of a particular doctrine is 100% a
WP:SYNTH issue. M.A.Spinn (talk) 15:36, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete - a classic SYNTH: throwing together a few isolated sources into an essay. Bearian (talk) 00:19, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to
WP:NOESSAY problems in this article. Dclemens1971 (talk) 21:19, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply
]
Redirect I think is also a suitable thing to do and I did happen upon the article expecting it to be about JPII's ToB and not an essay about an historical grabbag of sources. M.A.Spinn (talk) 17:25, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:34, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cavarrone 14:29, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - it seems to me that the proper question here is whether there are RS discussing the history of a theology of the body as framed on the page and outwith/beyond a specific address by Pope J-P 2. The answer to that is clearly yes, this source and this source and probably others. Not everything has to be framed as the thing that !delete !votes want.

That said, for goodness sake don't do references on a page like that. References are to assist the reader, layout like that hurts my soul. It's not necessary, it's not clever or helpful. JMWt (talk) 14:51, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to
WP:OR and has various other problems, so I think a redirect is the best option in this case.--DesiMoore (talk) 15:24, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply
]

St. Patrick Church (Wyandotte)

St. Patrick Church (Wyandotte) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Apparently non-notable parish church in metro Detroit. The only source provided is an official parish history, which is obviously non-independent. A
WP:BLAR was appropriate in that situation. Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:24, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture, Organizations, Christianity, and Michigan. Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:24, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I found more in a
WP:BEFORE search including sources from 1890: [14]. The book Catholic Churches of Detroit (Godzak, 2004) may not quite be SIGCOV, but there's good mention in Irish in Michigan (Metress & Metress, 2006). I stopped searching there. This absolutely needs better sources, I'm not yet convinced it's a keep but if it's not it's not too far off. SportingFlyer T·C 08:15, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:52, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to the list article recommended by Dclemens1971. —A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 04:18, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisted to allow for further discussion and participation.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ambrosiawater (talk) 08:00, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I can only find primary sources [15] or brief mentions [16]. Doesn't seem to be listed in the NRHP either. Oaktree b (talk) 12:09, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Trinity Christian School (Morgantown, West Virginia)

Trinity Christian School (Morgantown, West Virginia) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

I have carried out
WP:NSCHOOL. Redirect to Morgantown, West Virginia#Private schools is a possibility. Tacyarg (talk) 19:32, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, and West Virginia. Tacyarg (talk) 19:32, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:18, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

At least Weak Keep. Ideally, I'd like to see more in depth coverage from sources from further away, but there's a lot of documentation and enough I could find from other newspapers in the state.
"Trinity, St. Francis Schools Expand in Morgantown" (Feb 2006)[17] State Journal, Charleston

"Trinity Christian School Breaks Ground on New Wing" (November 2004)[18] Dominion Post

Residents Question Trinity Christians Impact (August 2004)[19] Dominion Post

"Trinity Christian opens new campus, transportation issues arise"(April 2005)[20] Dominion Post

"Trinity Adds Finishing Touches" (August 2005)[21] Dominion Post

"Trinity for sale to highest bidder: Bank looking to sell bankrupt Christian school" (May 2010) [22], Dominion Post

"Bank wants to sell bankrupt private school in Morgantown"(May 2010) [23], Charleston Gazette

"Trinity to keep school: Reaches deal with bank for $5 million" (July 2010) [24] Dominion Post

"Prep Sports:: Morgantown Christian school getting ready to tackle football" (Jan 2009) [25]" Charleston Daily Mail

More[26][27][28][29][30][31]

There are also hundreds of more routine sports articles, which actually makes it difficult to find the more in depth ones Jahaza (talk) 23:48, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete as private school it will have to pass
WP:NORG and I dont see any substantial in depth coverage from multiple independent sources. There is some coverage from a single newspaper but a lot is run of the mill and not in-depth, one single source is not multiple and trivial coverage of sports events does not constitute SIGCOV. --hroest

Weak keep - compared with most independent schools, this seems to get a lot of (at least local) media coverage. Bearian (talk) 17:17, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Weak arguments on both sides of the fence here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:20, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep In situations like this, I would normally go to Newspapers.com for sources. However, content from that state is surprisingly scarce. Sources in old newspapers likely exist, but they are hard to find. BeanieFan11, you are much better at navigating the Newspaper Archive than me. Is there anything you can do? The Knowledge Pirate (talk) 19:06, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 02:12, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Passes GNG. One good source showing in the footnotes; HERE is coverage from MaxPreps. [HERE is coverage of Trinity Christian's selection for part of a NASA mission via coverage of WBOY channel 12. There is a reason we used to have a special notability guideline insuring Keeps of high schools of documented existence — they are cultural centers of their communities. Not just public high schools, private schools as well. As a writer of sports bios for WP, high schools are a BASIC part of every sports bio and we should want these links to be blue, not red. Carrite (talk) 17:50, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Christianity Proposed deletions (
WP:PROD
)

CFSO-TV (via WP:PROD
on 14 May 2025)

Categories for discussion

Christian religious leaders: further follow-up required, see Category talk:Religious leaders#Clergy categories

Miscellaneous

Christianity

Christianity Proposed deletions (WP:PROD)

Categories for discussion

Miscellaneous

Christianity Proposed deletions (
WP:PROD
)