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. AFD is not cleanup, and consensus is clear she meets WP:GNG. Secret ^account 16:10, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Beth Moore (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)

Not much notability for this very generic televangelist, certainly not up to Wikipedia standards. Laval (talk) 01:44, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Wikipedia isn't the place for flash-in-the-pan pop stars. As such, this one wasn't much of a flash, either. Dead links, canned website, brief period of activity... not notable. Rklawton (talk) 01:53, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"pop star"? Are you reading the same article? This person is an evangelist and author. --Colapeninsula (talk) 15:17, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

have you read the article and sources? yes "pop star" is an appropriate analysis. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 15:20, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete and salt. It would appear to be a self-promotion article. Weak and light on citations and links.METOKNOWONLY (talk) 02:24, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I see no evidence that salting is necessary. Rklawton (talk) 02:27, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:48, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:49, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:49, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Once again, the quality of the article is irrelevant in deletion discussions. Easily passes WP:GNG - called the "most popular Bible teacher in America" in this cover story in Christianity Today. StAnselm (talk) 02:55, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The second and third Google News Archive links above, MLive and the Houston Chronicle, constitute multiple independent reliable sources. While the article does have a lot of non-RS'es and dead links, this appears to be a WP:BEFORE failure. Jclemens (talk) 04:52, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• delete per above Pass a Method talk 22:24, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete for failing WP:AUTHOR and WP:BOOK. Qworty (talk) 06:12, 20 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What about WP:GNG? StAnselm (talk) 06:15, 20 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep and cleanup - This subject meets WP:BASIC. Source examples include:

• Why Women Want Moore
• Beth Moore event at Van Andel Arena draws crowd of 7,300
• Beth Moore wants women to live with dignity
• Beth Moore Preaches to a sold-out PCCC Friday Night (short article)

— Northamerica1000^(talk) 08:56, 20 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep and clean up. Mutliple independent RSes. – SJ + 02:14, 21 March 2013 (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.