The result was delete and redirect to Gospel#Canonical gospels. The Bushranger One ping only 18:11, 26 October 2011 (UTC) reply
WP:N WP:OR This article is not notable and contains original research. Ret.Prof ( talk) 16:12, 19 October 2011 (UTC) reply
To claim SYNTH, you should be able to explain what "new claim" was made, and what sort of additional research a source would have to do in order to support the claim. This has not yet been established. - Ret.Prof ( talk) 18:56, 21 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Delete as per my nomination: The best way to solve this problem is to continue to develop the content in Gospel#Canonical gospels. If that section becomes too large, a discussion about a spin off can always be revisited. And with that I do believe we have consensus - Ret.Prof ( talk) 03:48, 23 October 2011 (UTC) reply
The result was delete and redirect to Gospel#Canonical gospels. The Bushranger One ping only 18:11, 26 October 2011 (UTC) reply
WP:N WP:OR This article is not notable and contains original research. Ret.Prof ( talk) 16:12, 19 October 2011 (UTC) reply
To claim SYNTH, you should be able to explain what "new claim" was made, and what sort of additional research a source would have to do in order to support the claim. This has not yet been established. - Ret.Prof ( talk) 18:56, 21 October 2011 (UTC) reply
Delete as per my nomination: The best way to solve this problem is to continue to develop the content in Gospel#Canonical gospels. If that section becomes too large, a discussion about a spin off can always be revisited. And with that I do believe we have consensus - Ret.Prof ( talk) 03:48, 23 October 2011 (UTC) reply