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 delete. Cirt (talk) 19:18, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

International Order of Gnostic Templars[edit]

International Order of Gnostic Templars (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Nominator's rational: Does not pass WP:ORG No indication that this organization is notable. No reliable third party sources that are independant of the subject. A google search on the name gives only 10 hits - seven to various self-published websites owned by the org or its founders, one to the Wikipeida article under discussion, and two promoting a self-published book written by one of the orgs founder. Google books only lists that self-published book. The article does contain a list of general references, but these are either self-published by people involved in the org, or relate to the historical Knights Templars and do not mention the IGOT at all. NOTE: While there are WP:FRINGE issues that could be argued, I do make them a part of this AfD nomination. I think the idea that the historical Templars might have had Gnostic knowledge is a notable enough concept to be discussed on wikipedia. This nomination does not focus on that. I focus purely on the argument that this particular organization is not notable. Blueboar (talk) 19:55, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Something is seriously wrong here. The article is currently full of derision, I get 11 Google News results and way more regular Google hits. Anybody passing by here should read the article. Joey the Mango (talk) 20:50, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment per the above, I've stubbified the article, the links provided had no relation or did not exist, and most, as you say, (more politely than me) was utter junk.--Alf ^melmac 21:05, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment by nominator: Hmmm... Joey is correct, there are more hits on Google (I have no idea what why my initial search ended after the first page).. so I will retract that comment. However, I am not sure if having all these additional hits is much of an improvement. Most of the hits are to websites that do nothing more than mention the name of the org in passing and are really promoting the founder's book. Blueboar (talk) 22:02, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 22:32, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 22:33, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have restored verifiable external references inadvertently deleted when this was reduced to a stub, but reading all the comments this seems to be a thinly disguised advert for "Da Vinci Code" tourism and should be deleted unless anyone has a good argument for retaining it.--Simsek (talk) 10:53, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - the only external source which I can see from the google hits which even remotely qualifies as reliable or independent is Coast to Coast AM. I don't think that's sufficient for a separate article. John Carter (talk) 15:18, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Furthermore, if you actually look at the Coast to Coast AM page in question, it does not discuss the organization at all. It mearly mentions it in passing as means of identification for an image of the group's founder (as in "... In the ceremony pictured left (click for larger) is Mark Amaru Pinkham, the Worthy Fisher King, The International Order of Gnostic Templars.") This is the case with almost all of the Google hits... the IOGT is only mentioned in relation to identifying who Mark Pinkham is. There is nothing on the group itself. Blueboar (talk) 15:34, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:NFT. A Google News search only finds passing mentions of the trips organised by this "order" and the only mentione found by Google Books is from a publisher that says its books are grouped into the categories: "Atlantic Studies, Alternative Health, Alternative Science, Ancient Science, Anti-Gravity, Conspiracy & History, Cryptozoology, Egypt & the Pyramids, Free Engery Systems, Geometry & Math, Holy Grail & Templar Studies, Lost Cities Series, Mysterious Phenomena, Mystic Travelers Series, Native American Studies, Philosophy & Religion, Strange Science, Tesla Technology, UFO's & Extraterrestrial and more.".[1] That certainly doesn't look like a reliable source to me, per WP:FRINGE. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:15, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per both ORG and NFT - The depth of coverage is not substantial and those independent sources seen to be reliable give trivial or incidental coverage. The original contributor may have no connection with the group, but that they are a "made up" organization and have not yet become well known to the rest of the world seems to be the case. Until enough third party sources exist to create at least a balanced stub, the topic should not be covered - I fully expect, if the group continues to exist, that we will hear more of the group in reliable sources, and who knows, maybe not just on the negative side either, at that point we can create a sounder footing for the topic.--Alf ^melmac 22:24, 6 June 2009 (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.