Deletion of Preacher's kid (2nd nomination)

Comment: The whole article is all original research or |synthesis
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SYN)

Comment: those Google Books hits include a very large number of reliable sources, discussing both the sociology of the phenomenon and the role of the stereotype in literature; that makes it notable under . The article is currently well-referenced, with references to 7 books and some other sources, and I'm not understanding the arguments for deletion. Special:Contributions/202.124.73.65|202.124.73.65
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: Not sure of the value of this article at all. Most of it appears to be 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR)

Comment: I see you have added an POV tag to the article, but neither here nor on the article talk page have you explained what the supposed NPOV violations are. There is a phenomenon (that of children of clergy) which is discussed both from outside the religious community (as sociology of religion, with considerable academic work) and within the religious community (as pastoral theology); the stereotype derived from the phenomenon is widespread in books, TV, and films (and is also discussed academically). The article incorporates all three points of view.  specifies "representing fairly, proportionately, and as far as possible without bias, all significant views that have been published by reliable sources." In my view this has been done, and there is no POV bias. Accordingly, I am removing the tag. I have found no other significant views that have been published by reliable sources -- if you are aware of them, please indicate what they are. Special:Contributions/202.124.74.154|202.124.74.154
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:NPOV)