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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 12:02, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

First Presbyterian Church (New Brunswick, New Jersey)[edit]

First Presbyterian Church (New Brunswick, New Jersey) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Non notable church, doesn't meet criteria for a company or organization, all coverage seems to be a passing mention or trivial in nature Yaksar (let's chat) 05:29, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as per nomination. Prsaucer1958 (talk) 19:54, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:37, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:37, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. A congregation that dates back to 1726, that was the subject of a book as long ago as 1852[1], and whose fire in 1946 was covered by The New York Times (which described the church as "historic")[2] is obviously notable. --Arxiloxos (talk) 04:53, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Old things are not necessarily notable. Stifle (talk) 15:59, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, can't see evidence of the substantial coverage which our guidelines demand. Stifle (talk) 15:59, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• How is a 52-page book about the subject not substantial coverage? Phil Bridger (talk) 21:55, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep "is one of the oldest churches in the Presbyterian denomination" says the lede and the New York Times. I love Stifle's sense of humor. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 23:48, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Well now, everyone has the right to give their input and reasoning, there's no reason to be demeaning like that.--Yaksar (let's chat) 00:00, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Huh? --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 00:40, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - it appears to be a historic church and one of its pastors is even notable enough to have been included in the 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica. But does it still exist as this name? Googling, I can't find any evidence of its continued existence, but I find http://newbrunswickpresbyterian.org/, which calls itself "The Presbyterian Church of New Brunswick, NJ" (not "First"). Are they one in the same? --B (talk) 01:28, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the name has changed as geography in New Jersey changed. It is earlier referred to as "Presbyterian Church" then "First Presbyterian Church" as a retronym when a second one was built in that Presbtyr. Then Presbyterian Church again after the second one disappeared. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 02:00, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as the article makes a more than credible claim of notability, supported by adequate sources. Alansohn (talk) 02:06, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep notability and sourcing look pretty good to me. The Interior (Talk) 02:46, 22 February 2011 (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.