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 move (draftify) to Draft:Orthodox Presbyterian Church of Korea. There was a rough consensus that while the notability of the subject of the article could not be established, its parent organisation probably is notable. 59.149.124.29 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) requested that the content of this article be preserved in a draft so that it could eventually be incorporated into an article on that parent organisation.

Note: I have placed an AfC submission template on the draft since the editor who intends to work on it is not logged in. This means that it will likely be deleted under WP:CSD#G13 if it is not worked on for six months. – Joe (talk) 20:56, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Korea Presbyterian Theological Seminary[edit]

Korea Presbyterian Theological Seminary (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)

This organisation does not appear to meet the guidelines for notability, and is closely related to two other related organisations Orthodox Presbyterian Church of Korea (recently deleted through AfD) and International Union of Reformed Churches (currently considered in AfD). The only secondary sources are incidental references and the article reads as G11. It would be useful to have some Korean readers look at the sources. Caorongjin (talk) 08:04, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Caorongjin (talk) 08:07, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Korea-related deletion discussions. Caorongjin (talk) 08:07, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The reasons for deleting the OPCK and KPTS articles are unwarranted. All information is available when you visit the official site of this institution. If there is something that is lacking, you can finish the article more. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.33.184.69 (talk) 21:19, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• This discussion for deletion is raised because the subject of all Wikipedia articles must be understood as notable. Moreover, citing an official website does not prove the organisation is notable. Instead, sources must show significant coverage in multiple, independent, reliable, secondary sources. It may be that it is too soon for the organisation and, when it is more notable, can have a valid article. --Caorongjin (talk) 21:38, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Caorongjin (talk) 21:40, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Non-notable organisation. Not many hits on Google and it looks like there is COI for the user who created this as they decided to create a duplicate which has been nominated for A10. Also, the user who created this article removed the deletion template twice and is constantly trying to stop the article from being deleted. Pkbwcgs (talk) 11:04, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment -- A college 105 years old with 12 teaching staff might be notable. Seminaries are typically small, but that does not prevent them being notable. What is more problematic is that we no longer have an article on Orthodox Presbyterian Church of Korea, whose speedy deletion ought not to have happened. If this is (as it sounds) a denomination, its AFD ought to have been allowed to run its course. I know nothing of the subject, so am not asking for DRV, but someone should. The normal rule is that denominations are notable but local churches are often not. Peterkingiron (talk) 13:00, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. The article seems to be well-referenced with citations to multiple news outlets. I can't read Korean, but I will assume good faith that they are real references. Plus, tertiary institutions are generally notable. StAnselm (talk) 19:16, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I can't work out whether it's accredited, but the list of faculty indicates that it's a real seminary. StAnselm (talk) 19:21, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment The citations in the article are not very good. Only the Daily World Religious News ones (#8 & #9 currently) appear to be on-topic and contribute to notability. #1 and #7 are just official websites of the parent organisation and the school. #3 Kukmin Daily isn't about this school at all and doesn't even contain the word "Presbyterian"; #2 Kookje Daily News and #6 Hankyoreh are WP:ROUTINE one-line events announcements, #4 Naver Knowledge In is WP:SOCIALMEDIA (the Korean equivalent of Yahoo Answers). Searching on the exact Korean name in Naver News gets only four hits, and ~900 in Google at large. Leaving off the word "Korea" (the first two Unicode codepoints in the Korean name) gets many more hits but I think those are almost all about another school (ko:장로회신학대학교) established in 1901. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 03:45, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - This article claims Park Geun-hye attended the school for a few months. To me, that strikes me as a fairly meaningful indication that the seminary is suitable for an article. I understand that this justification is, in a sense, a version of inherited. But the question really is, "Is this a real tertiary institution? To me, having faculty and alumni(?) of substance seems as good of an indicator as accreditation (which we haven't found indication of). Smmurphy^(Talk) 15:11, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  I assume you're referring to this passage in the article you linked: 박 대통령은 1981년 9월 서울 광진구 장로회신학대학교 대학원에 입학, 11월까지 다녔다 (emphasis mine). Rough translation: President Park entered the graduate school of the Presbyterian University Theological Seminary in Gwangjin District, Seoul in September 1981, and attended until November. That's referring to a different, much older school (ko:장로회신학대학교), which I also mentioned above in my comment as comprising most of the Google Hits on the name. The school we're discussing in this AfD is in Gangnam District, Seoul and was founded in 2012. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 04:25, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, you are right. Hmm, I'm not sure, and have struck my !vote. Smmurphy^(Talk) 15:59, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Draftify for potential merge Due to the language barrier, some commenters above made assumptions of good faith or accidental misinterpretations of sources, like that this school is 105 years old, that the newspapers cited in the article actually discuss this school, or that an ex-president attended. But in reality this is a six-year-old school with no evidence of notable alumni or faculty, and little media coverage. However I agree with User:Peterkingiron that the notability of the parent organisation Orthodox Presbyterian Church of Korea should be investigated more thoroughly. When I have time in the next few weeks I'll look for Korean-language sources, and if that denomination is actually notable, I'll draft an article about the denomination and merge the some of the content from the draft about the seminary there. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 04:25, 9 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• I would support the last suggestion. 59.149.124.29 needs to sign in when responding, so that there is a page where the text can be userified. If Orthodox Presbyterian Church of Korea is indeed a denomination, not merely a local church, its article should be reinstated. My view is that denominations (unless they only have one congregation) are notable. A short section on the denominational seminary can then be added to that; and the article converted to a redirect to that. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:22, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Draft as suggested above to allow the potential merger with the denomination which seems a valid outcome, thanks Atlantic306 (talk) 17:40, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Draftify at Draft:Orthodox Presbyterian Church of Korea#Korea Presbyterian Theological Seminary. Better to have the parent an sub organizations as a single draft to increase breadth of notability. Better in draft than userspace because the person originally who originally suggested draftifying is an IP. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 08:42, 17 June 2018 (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.