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. If he was a bishop, then keep. (non-admin closure) —☮JAaron95 ^Talk 08:07, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Johann Anton Friedrich Baudri

[edit]

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

He was a Vicar general i.e., deputy bishop. And being so per se doesn't make him notable. Per WP:CCWMOS (an essay), bishops and above are considered notable. And also, the subject doesn't pass WP:GNG. Think this should be deleted. Regards —☮JAaron95 ^Talk 11:42, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's the Bishop! He is notable, there are also reliable sources about him. It's a normal stub. Kmicic (talk) 11:51, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 05:55, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 05:55, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 05:55, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep likely as although this isn't this familiar subject, this would seem acceptable and may need familiar attention for any further information and sources. SwisterTwister talk 05:56, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:CLERGY. He was, in fact, a bishop. St Anselm (talk) 08:04, 28 September 2015 (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.