Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reformed fundamentalism
Reformed fundamentalism
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Reformed fundamentalism (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This is an ill-defined religious "movement". I doubt anyone identifies themselves as a Reformed fundamentalist. That's not necessarily fatal, but makes it harder to identify what the group is. You can google "Reformed fundamentalism" and find lots of hits, but many of them will be using it as a pejorative and foil for something else. I think it is possible that a phenomenon called "Reformed fundamentalism" exists as something that could be defined using reliable independent sources, but it would be difficult and this article does not even begin to attempt it. I think the current Christian fundamentalism page appears to do this quite well for that group, most of which would also not self-identify. But I think there are zero independent reliable sources in this article (even Packer is not independent), so I think the best course is WP:TNT. The article is original research sourced mostly to different groups and their beliefs, almost none of which identify themselves as "Reformed fundamentalists." The closest would be Packer's Fundamentalism and the Word of God, since Packer would identify as Reformed and wrote a book on fundamentalism. But even there Packer was writing a polemic to a broader audience than the Reformed world; he was not arguing for "Reformed fundamentalism" but Christian fundamentalism. Jfhutson (talk) 13:41, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 18:25, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:36, 10 April 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:55, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep the term is in use in the scholarly literature. The page may well need work but I'm not sure it is bad enough for WP:TNT JMWt (talk) 09:54, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - it really is a thing - particularly with the Bible Presbyterian Church and the Free Presbyterian Church of Ulster - but the article isn't very good. StAnselm (talk) 16:19, 23 April 2024 (UTC)