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. bibliomaniac15 04:12, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Religious community (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 article is based on the ambiguity of the word "community". Much of the article appears to be WP:OR. The lede seems like a dictionary entry (See WP:NOTADICT.) The body is a apparently a typology of Catholic institutes of consecrated life. I realize that the term "religious community" is widely used, but I don't see it described and defined in quality sources in any consistent way. Daask (talk) 05:13, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. Daask (talk) 05:13, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. (Added 20 June) Changed to abstain following discussion below. The criticism of the article as it stands seems reasonable (I haven't considered it in close detail), but the article is potentially valuable. It's an incomplete stub, needing adding to and editing. Perhaps a start would be to create empty headings on Tibetan Buddhist, Japanese, in antiquity, etc. communities? I don't see a problem with the ambiguity of the word "community"; I personally think that the article should focus on things like monasteries, with a brief mention that "community" is often taken to mean people with a shared attribute living in the wider world - I don't think there's a great deal to say about this wider use beyond possibly a link to the different religions. Pol098 (talk) 10:17, 12 June 2020 (UTC) Added: I've made a start, rewriting the OR (as my OR), separating out Catholicism, and adding stub sections for Buddhism and Orthodox Christianity. Pol098 (talk) 10:56, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Pol098: Where does the article title come from? Where is it defined? We can't just pull together things that seem similar to us and join them in an article. What sources describe the subjects you are discussing together? What is the difference from this article and Institute of consecrated life? or Monasticism? Daask (talk) 13:27, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sources added to article. I don't want to get into a discussion with one editor so may not respond further here; let's see the consensus. Best wishes Pol098 (talk) 13:52, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 12:16, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. The article does not currently draw a meaningful distinction between a religious community and a monastery, the latter already being amply covered, and the other uses (eg. Mennonites) appear to be in the same generic sense of "community" that one might say "the Jewish community" or "the Muslim community." @Pol098: can you please elaborate on how this page is not redundant to our coverage of monasticism? –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 14:58, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have the knowledge to go further, and don't have an opinion strong enough to try to make a case. If there are "religious communities" that don't fall under monasticism (I don't know if there are), maybe the article is justified; if not, perhaps not. If not justified as a separate article, possibly a disambiguation to Monasticism on the one hand, articles on the wider use on the other? Certainly present content (with my additions, just empty stub sections for different religions) isn't satisfactory. Best wishes, Pol098 (talk) 20:51, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, sorry for misunderstanding (perhaps) your role in the article. I'm inclined to say that the best course of action is probably to redirect this title to Religious order, since, when used as a term of art rather than the generic sense of "a community of people following the same religion," this appears to be what it refers to. I don't know if any kind of disambiguating hatnote at that target would be helpful, since I don't know what articles we have that cover the idea of people in a community following the same religion. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 17:07, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• leaning towards using some WP:TNT I think there is some reason for having an article on the history of communal living in various religions, but this article is definitely not going down that route and its current direction, towards cataloging every type of non-parochial body in the Catholic and Orthodox churches, is redundant. Mangoe (talk) 16:12, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Beyond the monastic orders, there has been various groups living in a community based upon a common religious outlook (e.g., Oneida Community, Rajneeshees, Hutterites, United Order, Branch Davidians, et al.) But as noted, the article would need serious work and better focus.--Surv1v4l1st ^{▌Talk|Contribs▌} 23:28, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep but allow mass cleanup of everything unsourced. Tessaracter (talk) 15:29, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Agree with Daask. The subject is really unclear, and the term 'religious community' is too broadly used to have a meaningful article. --hippo43 (talk) 21:39, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete This article uses two opposing definitions for "religious community". Using both of those definitions at the same time is not really an option, so if this is to become a useful article, one of them should be chosen. If we choose the one definition, we might as well redirect to religious order, as noted above by Roscelese. If we choose the other definition, we might as well redirect to religious organisation, though currently that article is focused on legal aspects and does not discuss the sociological aspects. I do not see the need for a separate article named "religious community". PJvanMill (talk) 20:51, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: This afd reminds me of a similar recent afd - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aurat (word). It's mostly OR and will lead to content forking if kept. - Harsh 23:22, 4 July 2020 (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.