Is there enough information about Tom & Sandie Kilian and the organization MERCY PARTNERS to create a wikipedia page(s)?
Executive summary
There is a modest but patchy public record that could support a basic Wikipedia entry for MERCY PARTNERS and short biographical entries for Tom and Sandie Kilian, but the material currently available is largely self-published, organizational, and promotional rather than independently sourced, which falls short of Wikipedia’s reliable‑source and notability standards [1] [2] [3].
1. What the sources show about MERCY PARTNERS’ existence and activities
The organization MERCY PARTNERS maintains an active website that describes programs, a board, an executive director, and initiatives such as Bridge Campus, immediate care in conflict zones, education, discipleship and a Darfur Christian Mission origin story—details that establish the group’s mission, programs, and structure from primary‑source material [1] [4] [5] [6] [7].
2. What the sources show about Tom and Sandie Kilian
Tom Kilian is named as founder and executive director on MERCY PARTNERS’ site and related profiles, with biographical claims about early life, theological training, an Operation Raleigh expedition, art projects leading to a Darfur exhibit, and field work in Sudan and South Sudan that inspired programs such as art therapy and immediate care; Sandie is presented as administrative lead and co‑designer of education and gender reconciliation initiatives and as land donor for Bridge Campus [1] [3] [8] [5] [4] [6].
3. Independent verification and third‑party coverage — where it’s weak
Reliable, independent coverage that Wikipedia favors—newspaper features, peer‑reviewed publications, governmental filings with narrative context, or investigative reporting—is scarce in the provided material; the GuideStar/Charity profile documents tax and organizational facts and references programs and a ruling year, which helps independent verification of nonprofit status but does not substitute for independent press coverage assessing impact or notability [2]. Business directory entries (ZoomInfo, Spokeo) corroborate names and roles but are secondary directory data, not journalistic or academic sources [9] [10] [11].
4. Strengths and weaknesses for creating Wikipedia pages
Strengths include detailed primary material: an organizational website with program descriptions, named leadership, and historical anecdotes [1] [7] [6]. GuideStar adds nonprofit documentation useful for verifiable facts like founding/ruling year and mission statements [2]. Weaknesses are decisive: much of the content is self‑authored or self‑published, there is minimal independent third‑party significant coverage evaluating the organization’s broader impact, and biographical claims about the Kilians (expeditions, art exhibits, field encounters) lack corroborating independent sources in the provided set [3] [8].
5. Practical recommendation and minimum steps before drafting Wikipedia articles
A cautious path forward would be to assemble a short, neutral stub for MERCY PARTNERS using verifiable facts from GuideStar and the organization’s site for basic organizational data, while avoiding promotional language and explicitly noting the reliance on primary sources; however, to meet Wikipedia’s notability guidelines and avoid deletion risk, the case needs third‑party, independent coverage—local or national news articles, charity watchdog evaluations, academic or NGO reports referencing MERCY PARTNERS’ programs, or independent profiles of Tom and Sandie Kilian—none of which are present in the provided reporting [2] [1] [3]. If independent sources can be located, separate short biographies for Tom and Sandie could be justified, but until then a single organizational article with brief, well‑sourced leadership mentions is the safer, policy‑compliant approach.