Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Prophecies of Joseph Smith

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by JamesBurns (talk | contribs) at 06:40, 16 July 2005 ([[Prophecies of Joseph Smith]]). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

I don't see any way that this article could eventually conform to NPOV. It has about as much potential as a page devoted to examining the Scriptural backgrounds of papal proclamations. Furthermore, by analyzing the claimed prophecies, it would violate the "No original research" policy. Analysis of whether a prophecy is true prophecy or not belongs on sites other than Wikipedia. Kadett 23:36, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - we know that everyones always going to put NPOV language and of coiurse thier own opinions into this, if we look at the edit history, hence delete. Gabrielsimon 23:40, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment This has already been discussed. The article has undergone major changes as a result. I believe the idea right now is to document the prophesies only, and make no attempt to determine truthfullness, which, as you've suggested, would be inappropriate. I thought this page should go away previously as it could serve only to promote fighting. See the take page for history and details. Friday 23:54, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Notable, encyclopedic so long as it is essentially a laundry list of what the prophecies were. -- BDAbramson talk 00:10, July 16, 2005 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep, but only if it fits into the style suggested by BDAbramson Youngamerican 01:32, 16 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, but only if it can be brought up to a reasonably comprehensive list of prophecies and placed in something resembling chronological order. --MrWhipple 02:47, 16 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep. Up until recently I had serious reservations about this article, but they have since been resolved. In its present form, it's informative, neutral, and does not represent 'original research' in any way. Gregmg 03:59, 16 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete POV fork, agree with Gabrielsimon. JamesBurns 06:40, 16 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]