Mightn't it? I know rules for churches look very strict. But the exclusion should IMO be applied to those plenty of post-war suburb churches. Otherwise, rules would be inconsistent, beacuse probably a fivehundred year old intact building which any other use than a church would be deemed worthy. And with the indirect rule that relevance for Wikipedia certifies relevance for VI. --Ikar.us (talk) 09:30, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Quoting from the guidelines "Not any church is worth a Valued Image scope. Cathedral scopes are OK, but for other churches there should be a good reason, like being a pilgrimage place, being really famous, being architecturally exceptional... ". This nom could do with some strong arguments for me to change my vote. Lycaon (talk) 05:51, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Besides its age, this church is famous in regional church history, because in 1551, clergy from Norden and Emden met here, in the middle between their towns, to settle an eucharistic dispute and sign the Formula Wirdumana. --Ikar.us (talk) 10:20, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support After having read this document in German through Google translation, p. 1 & 2 about the church, the theological dispute and the Formula Wirdumana; see also this mention in Dutch. Moreover, this church has a (short) article on its own in de:WP since May 2008. This QI is the best of the available images IMO. --Myrabella (talk) 10:17, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
