Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Kwangshin Kim

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. Star Mississippi 02:57, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

David Kwangshin Kim

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Pastor of unclear notability. Article has no secondary sources. His ministry may be notable, but unsure if Kim is notable. Natg 19 (talk) 18:51, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Religion. Natg 19 (talk) 18:51, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of South Korea-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 19:22, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Zero hits elsewhere, but I find one mention in GBooks ("The Religions of Los Angeles") and what looks like a brief mention in JSTOR about missionary churches. Leaning non-notable, might find more detailed sources in Korean language items? Oaktree b (talk) 20:00, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:10, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep as he is the head of a notable ministry. Davidgoodheart (talk) 23:17, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:44, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, KO Wikipedia cites to nontrivial coverage in several sources, including the Kukmin Ilbo[1] and Mission Times[2]. Even if these sources were rejected for some reason, there seems little doubt that others could be found with some effort. -- Visviva (talk) 23:18, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Subject appears more than notable and article should be able to be improved upon with available sources.Bookworm857158367 (talk) 21:47, 24 May 2022 (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.