The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. The article as nominated appears to have garnered sufficient "keep" policy-based discussion. Attempts to fix any issues brought it even more "keep", and attempts by the nominator to remove positive additions has been disruptive overall. Clear policy-based "keep" the panda ₯’ 22:17, 29 June 2014 (UTC) reply

History of the Jews in Nepal

History of the Jews in Nepal (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The article is purported to be about history, but the article describes no history, with the earliest date referred to being 1986, with absolutely no historical context or relevance. The article does not meet the notability criteria. Ubikwit ^連絡 _{見学/迷惑} 08:52, 19 June 2014 (UTC) reply

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log ( step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2014 June 19. — cyberbot I ^Notify_Online 09:14, 19 June 2014 (UTC) reply
• Comment That may be an argument for renaming the article, but certainly not for deletion. RolandR ( talk) 10:00, 19 June 2014 (UTC) reply

*Merge with Israel-Nepal relations. That is essentially what this article is about. L'Aquotique ( talk) 10:06, 19 June 2014 (UTC) -Check User Confirmed WP:SOCKPUPPET [1] reply

That sounds like the most appropriate option.-- Ubikwit ^連絡 _{見学/迷惑} 10:30, 19 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Not a bad option if the article is expanded following my suggestion below. Pity it came from someone like that--it typically poisons the well. Drmies ( talk) 01:49, 27 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nepal-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 15:16, 19 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 15:16, 19 June 2014 (UTC) reply

• Keep - I would err on the side of assuming notability, as this article comes from a link in the almost-entirely-filled-out {{Asia in topic|History of the Jews in}} template. The topic seems pretty notable, and if the article could do with some (or a lot of) expansion, that's not a matter for AfD. ∴ ZX95 ^{[ discuss} 02:25, 21 June 2014 (UTC) reply

There is no' history to speak of whatsoever in the article. It is not an article bout history. Accordingly, not only is notable as history, and the article should be merged as per L'Aquotique, because it is not an article about anything else, properly speaking.-- Ubikwit ^連絡 _{見学/迷惑} 03:39, 22 June 2014 (UTC) reply

• Keep for a number of reasons. Firstly, the current content of the article is mostly about the work of Chabad who are a Hasidic Orthodox religious Jewish outreach group that has nothing to do with the secular Jewish state of Israel as such, they are based out of Brooklyn, New York, USA, and it would not make sense to make that part of Nepal-USA relations either! Secondly, Jewish history spans 3,000+ years, while the modern state of Israel was founded only in 1948! "Jewish history" and "Israel" are not the same thing, if anything Israel as a topic is a sub-group of Jewish history. Nepal's history is also divided into different eras stretching back millennia and there is still lots of ongoing scholarship. Thirdly, Nepal is a unique country that straddles the Himalayas. Nepal is landlocked to the south by India on three sides and by China to the north. Thus Nepal's history is tied in with the history of (a) the Himalayas, (b) northern India, and (c) southern China -- and that is how one can find references that have a direct bearing on the "History of the Jews in Nepal"! Finally, therefore, see for example South Asian ethnic groups: "Indo-Aryans form the predominant ethno-linguistic group in Northern India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Nepal, Sri Lanka and the Maldives...Syrian Malabar Nasranis are descendents of both Hindu and Jewish converts to Christianity" and Googling "Jews + Himalayas", "Jews + northern India", "Jews + southern China" reveals a connection between Jews and Nepal and an intersection in Jewish history with the history of Nepal, see Origins and Migrations in the Extended Eastern Himalayas: ("...A second nation included the Jews and Arabs, the Assyrians..."); The Bnei Menashe of Northeastern India: ("The Bnei Menashe trace their journey from northern Israel to Assyria— modern-day Iraq—to Afghanistan, and through the Himalayas to Mongolia."); In the Himalayas and on the Indian Plains: (..." Syrian Jews (the tradesmen of 1,900 years ago)"...); Jews Have Been in China A Long, Long Time: ("...a 9th century Arab traveler wrote about his experiences, which included a report of a massacre of Christians, Moslems and Jews in southern China."); India Virtual Jewish History Tour: ("Migrations in the 16th and 17th centuries created important settlements of Jews from Persia, Afghanistan and Characin (Central Asia) in northern India and Kashmir."), and more like this, so please be more careful and do not jump to conclusions. Thank you, IZAK ( talk) 07:08, 22 June 2014 (UTC) reply
  • • First, WP:NOTSOAPBOX and WP:NOTFORUM.

You mention some fringish sources to produce WP:OR in order to support you ivot!, which is inadmissible.

Bnei Menashe has absolutely no connection to Jews before

the Israeli Rabbi Eliyahu Avichail founded Amishav (Hebrew for "My People Return"), an organisation dedicated to locating the lost tribes of Israel and assisting aliyah. He learned of the group in northeastern India in 1983

Note one source or statement you make in that WP:WOT would confer a grain of notability on the article at issue.

Furthermore, now that you point out the connection of Chabad, the article seems like nothing more than a puff piece aimed at promoting the activities of that organization under false pretense.-- Ubikwit ^連絡 _{見学/迷惑} 11:35, 22 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Hi Ubikwit: Thank you for your attempt at a constructive response. However, the more you carry on the more confused and incoherent your responses become. First you want to connect this topic with "Israel" that has nothing to do with Chabad, then you all of a sudden realize (after I point it out yet) that this topic should be connected with "Chabad" and not so much with Israel. This reflects serious confusion that should have been thought through a lot better before you jump to nominate complex topics for anything. Sorry to say it but your entire argument just seems to come off as WP:IDONTLIKEIT and WP:LIKE which is not good enough here. In any case, the sum of all the sub-topics in this article, i.e. Jews in Nepal, Nepal's relationship with Israel, Chabad's work in Nepal etc all come under the rubric of History of the Jews in Nepal regardless of their numbers, their origins, when they showed up or what they do there, it is all WP:V and based on WP:RS and has much room for growth, see WP:DONOTDEMOLISH and WP:CHANCE. As for your critique of my post, you owe me an apology, because as I pointed out, the correct way to start researching this topic is by looking at the history of the region that Nepal lies in which is in the Himalayas and its geographic surroundings that has been in existence way before the formation of "Nepal" as it is known today and as my citations above show in the course of time various types of Jews have been crisscrossing it for millennia. Thank you, IZAK ( talk) 20:28, 23 June 2014 (UTC) reply

No, none of what you have described falls under the rubric of History of anything.

Why do you continue to make baseless assertions, such as that about "'Nepal' as it is known today'"? Do you think you know some WP:TRUTH that is not represented in reliable sources? Wikipedia requires RS verification, Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth

And then there is the assertion regarding the geography of the Himalayas, which claims that "various types of Jews have been crisscrossing it for millennia", which is yet another fanatsy that would have nothing to due with Nepal, as the area is known today, at any rate. Moreover, you can't produce a single reliable source that supports that fanciful view of history.

The sole constructive contribution you have made is to point out that the article is as much about Chabad as Israel. Nothing in your WP:SOAPBOXING supports WP:NOTABILITY regarding the stub at issue.

To ask me for an apology based on my rational and policy-based refutation of your unsourced POV-pushing assertions verges on being trollish.-- Ubikwit ^連絡 _{見学/迷惑} 02:36, 24 June 2014 (UTC) reply

• Keep and link to WP:ODD. Bearian ( talk) 17:32, 23 June 2014 (UTC) reply

That article in no way establishes notability for this article in terms of history.

The only thing odd about it is that it was able to be created in the first place on Wikipedia with no relevant content related to the title.

The relevant content seems to belong under two separate articles, according to a couple of the posts above. Some of it belongs in Israel-Nepal relations, and other in Chabad. There has not been a single reliably published statement verifying any historical connection between Nepal and Jews, and according to the first line of the stub, even today

The permanent Jewish community in Nepal is very small and consists largely of diplomatic officials and Chabad staff.

. -- Ubikwit ^連絡 _{見学/迷惑} 17:51, 23 June 2014 (UTC) reply

• Keep per Bearian and numerous references. One comment, I think the article is not only about the history of Jews in Nepal, but more about relations between the two countries, as well as about Israelis/Jews in Nepal.-- Tomwsulcer ( talk) 23:28, 23 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Yet another unsupported !vote to keep without establishing notability. There has still not been a single reliably sourced statement that mentions the "history of Jews in Nepal".

In fact, the sole hit returned by a Google search of "history of Jews in Nepal", is to the Wikipedia article.

This is becoming a farcical discussion, with me being the sole vote to Delete/Merge, and only one other editor suggesting a Merge.-- Ubikwit ^連絡 _{見学/迷惑} 02:36, 24 June 2014 (UTC)12:59, 24 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Incidentally, I just noticed your changes to the article, and reverted them, as per the edit summary. The attempt you made is illustrative of the problem for the purpose of this discussion though, so I note it here.-- Ubikwit ^連絡 _{見学/迷惑} 02:47, 24 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Frankly, Ubikwit, please remember to act in good faith. You want this article to be deleted. I added references. You removed them. The additions are all relevant to the topic of Jews in Nepal, what they do, their interactions with Nepali, and so forth, that is, their history. Perhaps the article could be better named but this is not a reason to revert references.-- Tomwsulcer ( talk) 10:53, 24 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Do you understand what history is? There is no "their" history of Jews in Nepal since the 1990s. That is to near in the recent past to encompass a period during which something called a history could be established.

Don't say that the article could be renamed, on the one hand, and then make no suggestions to that end while attempting to substantiate the present article by adding references and material that do not relate to history.

The article is not called "Jews in Nepal"", incidentally, but if that is a suggestion, then that raises the question as to whether an article with that title would meet the notability criteria is another question. I imagine that it wouldn't.

If all it takes is to establish an embassy and have a religious organization active in a given country, then Wikipedia would have an History of the ^~^ article for every country that has an embassy in Nepal, and by extension, an article for each respective country that has an embassy in any country fr every country in which a given country has an embassy, which is not notable in and of itself other than perhaps for inclusion on a List article. So the suggestion by L'Aquotique has merit, but probably wouldn't encompass the material on Chabad.

There is no rationale in your arguments that is supported by policy. Furthermore, I have referenced relevant policies to which you have not responded, but instead attempted a rhetorical redefinition of history as "their history". Wikipedia is not a blog about "Jews in Nepal".-- Ubikwit ^連絡 _{見学/迷惑} 11:23, 24 June 2014 (UTC) reply

History is what happened in the past. It can span thousands of years; or centuries; or decades. Like it or not, the topic History of Jews in Nepal encompasses what Jewish people, who are inside Nepal, do, say, think, act, etc. When I revamped the article by adding many references to make a better article here, you reverted it; in my view, this seems like an underhanded last-ditch attempt to sway the final decision regarding this deletion discussion. While perhaps there could be a better article title, it does not make sense to merge this article into Israel-Nepal relations, since the latter article is about government-to-government relations, while this article is about cultural ties among non-official people, particularly, Jewish people in Nepal. So when a Jewish artist brings Dead Sea rocks to Nepal, it is part of the history of Jews in Nepal. Or, a Jewish climber rescues a Turkish climber, in Nepal, it belongs in the article. That it did not happen in the 1700s is irrelevant; that it happened in the past, is.-- Tomwsulcer ( talk) 11:53, 24 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Wikipedia has notability criteria, for which the present article does not qualify being called an article on the history of anything. You have wikilinked to the history article, but apparently you don't understand the meaning of history.

There simply doesn't seem to be a significant enough presence of Jews in Nepal for there to be any other type of article that might meet the notability criteria, either.

Your mentioning of culture, for example, with respect to what i gather was a hypothetical example of an artist bringing Dead Seあ rocks to Nepal would not merit an independent article, even if the artist were notable. As I said Wikipedia is not a blog about Jews in Nepal.

Accusing me of being underhanded for reverting material that does not describe history is making a false accusation about conduct to try and win a content dispute. Please do not do that again.-- Ubikwit ^連絡 _{見学/迷惑} 12:44, 24 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Suppose an article is up for deletion. Another contributor adds references, improves the article. These are reverted. So an article on the chopping block, without references, gets references added, but is then again sliced up to have no references. Sure seems like a severe violation of Wiki-etiquette. See, if I find another source suggesting strong historical ties between Jews and Nepalis, such as here, suggesting 52 years of exchanges (ten, count 'em 10, decades, plus two years to boot), if I try to add it, it will get reverted. So, what can be done?-- Tomwsulcer ( talk) 15:13, 24 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Further, the subject of recentism is often misunderstood. It does not give any contributor the right to delete or revert any recent information willy nilly, like if it happened in the past two years or ten years. Rather, it is about balance, with the idea being to not overly-tip an article towards only recent events, to the detriment of the overall subject. If an article is about a 50-year history of Jews in Nepal, then deleting information because it happened within the past decade does not make sense. Recentism should be applied as a test of the whole article, not any particular piece of information, otherwise Wikipedia would not carry any information about stuff that happened in the past year or so.-- Tomwsulcer ( talk) 15:13, 24 June 2014 (UTC) reply

The article already mentions that diplomatic relations were established in the 1960s, that a lot of Israelis backpack there, and that Chabad has a presence there (running lodging houses for backpackers, apparently). The only new point in the source you presented is a commemorative stamp, which is basically trivial, and is relates to diplomatic relations between two states. It is an exaggeration to characterize that source as "suggesting strong historical ties between Jews and Nepalis".

After diplomatic relations were established there is no mention of anything until when? Oh, 1986, in relation to a Jewish religious ceremony for Jewish travelers, not Nepalis. The next mention is 1999, in relation to the same ceremony, taken over by Chabad from the Israeli embassy. Let's paraphrase that. The entire history of Jews in Nepal is covered by the establishment of diplomatic relations, and the conducting of a Jewish religious ceremony for Jewish travelers.

A notable article on history that content does not make.

You are free to add anything of relevance to the article that is about the topic of the article. The only thing misunderstood here is apparently the concept of history. If the above source is the best you can find, the article simply doesn't meet the notability criteria.-- Ubikwit ^連絡 _{見学/迷惑} 15:35, 24 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Let's let the closing admin decide.-- Tomwsulcer ( talk) 16:24, 24 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Of course.

I just noticed that my google search above omitted the "the" from the title, so I retried it. Every result on the first page returned from a google search of the article title either is the Wikipedia article, or points to it. (The last result on the page is a miss because it is a search engine that removed the quotes [2])

If there are no other sources out there, which seems likely considering thethere is probably no need to prolong this process any further.-- Ubikwit ^連絡 _{見学/迷惑} 08:03, 25 June 2014 (UTC) reply

• Move otherwise Delete It seems to me that the accurate naming of this article is pretty difficult. The best that I can manage is something on the lines of "Jewish presence in Nepal". I fully agree that there is no history, at least in my understanding of history. There can, however, be a lot of presence. The Israeli army can be a tough experience and there has now become a fairly established tradition for young Israelis to get away from Israel upon release and, it seems, get high. (edit: My strongest positive memory of Israeli Jews in Nepal was of an Israeli friend smoking a splif at someething like 5km altitude somewhere to the north of Dingboche and en route to the southern Everest Base Camp). The two main destinations for typically young Israelis are South America and the Himalayas and I have signs in Hebrew in non Jewish owned shops in both Kathmandu and Pokhara. The vast majority of Jews in Nepal are Israelis with the possible exception of Chabadists who are only there for other Jews. (Edit: I have no personal bad experiences with Chabadists but have born witness to comments to indicate that some religious Jews can have opinions as follows (end edit) Other people can sometimes be regarded as barely that). The diplomatic relations mentioned would probably have been something along the lines of a letter with little great substance being sent each way. Its hardly history. However there is definitely a justification for the writing of some form of article about the very lively presence of Jews in Nepal. (edit: an article entitled history would have a lessened chance of encapsulating a wider experience of Jews in Nepal) They've held some great parties (edit: although the best ones were in India in popular Israeli destinations Manali, Himachal Pradesh and Kasol. I also object to the comments by IZAK: "attempt at a constructive response" and "the more you carry on the more confused and incoherent your responses become." I don't know if you are Israeli but this seems synonymous with darker side of Israeli Rudeness). Gregkaye ( talk) 22:37, 25 June 2014 (UTC) reply
  • Ah yes Gregkaye, let's revise history and just call everything that happens in history -- "presence" instead, like instead of History of the Jews in Germany lets rename it to Presence of the Jews in Germany etc etc etc and all the other dozens of articles in Category:Jewish history by country will be "Presence of the Jews in ____" even if the Jews are no longer present, or what amount of time will then qualify as valid "presence" according to this new notion of yours? Goodbye history, hello presence. And no I do not have a "darker side", just a hard-working editor, and it seems that both you and the nominator haven't heard of WP:NPA when the flow of the argument goes against you (he labels me as "troll"-like while you label me as a sorta " Darth Vader" from the "dark side" or is that just another way of getting at an editor you perceive to be "too Jewish" for your liking?) To repeat, Chabad has nothing to do with Israel-Nepal relations it is a Brooklyn, USA based movement, while Israel-Nepal relations is definitely a part of the modern history of the Jews in Nepal. The other refs I cite about the need to look into Jews and the Himalayas is also relevant. Sorry to say it, but your !Vote also makes no sense, as if to say if historical facts do not meet the little narrow box you create for it, then it must be deleted does not help to build and grow Wikipedia as an all-inclusive encyclopedia. Thank you, IZAK ( talk) 07:44, 26 June 2014 (UTC) reply

• Ah yes IZAK, you make weak comparisons … and this is even when you use a potential trump card: when facing any form of opposition, whether its justified or not, mention the holocaust. Of course there is no argument that there is a genuine and tragic history of minority groups in Germany having a total of 13 million lives of Jews, gypsies, blacks etc. being lost. But that is not a question that has relevance here. The question regards a potential title for this article. I have indicated the fact that there is a regular presence of largely Israeli Jews in Himilayan regions such as Nepal and the locality. The wider story relates to present travel habits of Jewish people without which there would be no presence of organisations such as Chabad in Nepal. I'd interpret that it is the causative factor that is the important one in a picture and that reactions concerning comparatively minimal numbers of people are a secondary concern. Who said anything about saying goodbye to objective and fair studies of history. Again, the ONLY discussion is on the most appropriate title for the article.

I also have to now deal with some superfluous issues to the actual discussion. You mention WP:NPA so can I remind you that your very first words in this discussion were: “Hi Ubikwit: Thank you for your attempt at a constructive response. However, the more you carry on the more confused and incoherent your responses become." Good God man! I responded to those comments for two reasons: 1) Chabad representatives constitute a tiny proportion of Jews in Nepal and 2). The person you attacked wasn't even the one that first suggested an Israel Nepal association. L'Aquotique had suggested Merge with Israel-Nepal relations and in this context and at that point Ubikwit interpreted. That sounds like the most appropriate option. Since that time he commented that Some of it belongs in Israel-Nepal relations, and other in Chabad.  Ubikwit has shown signs that he can change his views when presented with correct information and, as far as I have seen, he has not justified the accusation that the “more you carry on the more confused and incoherent your responses become." I commented that these were rude and I put this perceived rudeness in a relevant context. When travelling in the region of the subcontinent of India I had many conversations on the topic of rudeness. In this article I made a link regarding a frequently discussed topic of Israeli rudeness but within the search list the first item mentioned concerned a perceived rudeness of Israeli shopkeepers. In reference to this I interpreted your rude comments as being paralleled by a dark side of the mentioned rudeness. We can also note that many things have dark sides including fantasy creations like the force in Star Wars, real things like any physical object in sunlight and various works of art such as Pink Floyd's moon. You also mentioned “two Jewish” for my liking and it seems that I must also make defence against accusations that have no justification. I mentioned “My strongest positive memory of Israeli Jews in Nepal was of an Israeli friend smoking a splif at someething like 5km altitude”. He was a hilarious and great companion. I mentioned that “ I have no personal bad experiences with Chabadists”, additionally mentioned “great parties” and encourage an effort for “encapsulating a wider experience of Jews in Nepal”. I have no problem regarding people being “Too Jewish” just comments that are "Too rude".

You further assert “Sorry to say it, but your !Vote also makes no sense” and I take that sorry in the same context as your earlier “Thank you for your attempt at” comment. I made clear, unconfused and coherent arguments. I could go on to mention the implied connotations of a “no sense” comment but I'm sure you can work them out yourself. Gregkaye ( talk) 10:24, 26 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Gregkaye: I am focused on the logic and content of the arguments while you want to smear me with "rudeness" and the "dark side" that is obviously just a red herring. If you can't take the heat then get out of the kitchen. This is serious discussion. You have had your say, and you claim that Jews (Israelis, Chabad people, rabbis, Jewish religious events, Jewish travelers etc) in Nepal over the last few decades does "not" amount to Jewish history but it is rather a "presence" in a far off land and I am disagreeing with both your perspective and assessment, that seems to bother you enough to write me long megilas. There is no rule anywhere that says that what has transpired over recent decades (Israelis, Chabad people, rabbis, Jewish religious events, Jewish travelers etc in Nepal) is somehow "not" history. There is also no rule that says that because Jews anywhere (Germany or Nepal or where have you) are few in number (in relation to the general populations around them, Jews are always VERY few in number) but that is no reason to disregard them and relegate them to other articles just because WP:IDONTLIKE Jews in Nepal as being part of overall Jewish history. You are the one to mention the Holocaust and you wish to attribute your allusions and innuendos as coming from "the dark side" just as I was accused of being like a "troll" and then backing off when I call you on it. There are better ways to make your argument besides wanting that this article, albeit basically only a stub at this point, should be wiped off the map or merged into oblivion some place else. I find it funny to be compared to " Darth Vader" from the Dark Side, what shall I say to you then? "Gregkaye! I am your 'father'!"? Vader's most famous quote. Thanks, IZAK ( talk) 10:54, 26 June 2014 (UTC) reply

P.S. I wouldn't run to quote User L'Aquotique ( talk · contribs) who is now blocked [3] for being a WP:CHECKUSER confirmed WP:SOCKPUPPET. Which "dark side" is at work here now? Hmmm, IZAK ( talk) 11:09, 26 June 2014 (UTC) reply

• Keep - There are two Chabad houses in Nepal—one in Pokhara and one in Kathmandu. Chabad is a Jewish outreach group. The reason Chabad maintains a presence in Nepal is to serve the Jews of Nepal. These may be young Jewish backpackers. They don't have to be permanent residents of Nepal. Bus stop ( talk) 11:56, 26 June 2014 (UTC) reply

• The nominator also had a clear focus on the clear argument that The article is purported to be about history, but the article describes no history. I made a number of clear concise comments in my late opener and in a marked edit I made one accusation regarding rudeness. What is said is said and all that I will add is that when many people face a clearly justified accusation of rudeness they often do well to retract or even apologise. You are also free to to state any opinion as to why you think the comments were not rude … but you know that.

Your comment also insinuates that I am not focussed on the logic and content of the arguments, that I want to smear you ( I don't know you at least not to a personal extent) and that I cant take the heat and that I compare your unjustifiable rudeness in this article to the actions of a fictional destroyer of planets. I also find the comparison to have a level of humour about it. Perhaps now we can return to the subject.

There was a recent successful AfD submission on /info/en/?search=List_of_Chabad_Houses_in_Israel with no registered Keeps. it was commented that “ Very few Chabad houses are individually notable” and, getting to the discussion late (perhaps its a habit), I commented that the Chabad house article contains a link to a Worldwide directory of Chabad Houses which now appears at the top of external links. Indeed Ihad placed the link there so as to give it more prominence.

I would venture to say that there is no-one with an acquaintance with Jewish society that would in anyway be surprised that there are Chabad houses in places in which Jewish people travel. This is a no-brainer and is in no way notable.

There is nothing of historical note in the article. Gregkaye ( talk) 12:02, 26 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Recent Jewish history and recent Nepalese history could just as well show no Jewish presence in Nepal. But that is not the case. I think that this article has as its purpose the capturing of Jewish/Nepalese history. Is that history too sparse or too recent to justify an article of this scope? There is nothing in the article that is not reliably sourced and it is a brief article in keeping with the availability of well-sourced information. Bus stop ( talk) 12:32, 26 June 2014 (UTC) reply

I would say yes. The whole situation would be better served if there were just five History of the Jews articles for Asia. There could be articles for: Western Asia, Russia, Central Asia, East Asia and Southeast Asia. In cases in which a country has a Jewish history that is notable to the extent of justifying an individual article then the typical convention of the use of a main article tag could be used. This would also enable the comparison of information across national boundaries which often have little to do with cultural difference and would potentially save a lot of repetition. Gregkaye ( talk) 13:25, 26 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Gregkaye has put it aptly in that there is nothing of historical note in the article.

The qualification of history with "recent" is also not factual, because there is nothing of historical note in the article, recent or otherwise.

I don't know where the material in the article might fit on Wikipedia, but most definitely not in an article of the present title. -- Ubikwit ^連絡 _{見学/迷惑} 13:14, 26 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Just like to remind people that (what I consider to be) an improved version of this article, with many references, can be found here in my sandbox where it can not be reverted.-- Tomwsulcer ( talk) 14:38, 26 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Thank you. Did you find a suitable name for it that meets Wikipedia's notability criteria?-- Ubikwit ^連絡 _{見学/迷惑} 15:09, 26 June 2014 (UTC) reply

• Delete: This article, and the slightly longer, more documented version in Tomwsulcer's sandbox, is about Israeli tourism in Nepal. While it is true that Chabad is not strictly an Israeli organization (it has headquarters in Brooklyn as well as in Israel), the Chabad houses in Nepal serve Israelis almost exclusively. And, while these particular versions of the article seem awfully cooked-up - what I think policy-savvy wikipedians would call WP:SYNTH - I think there well be a story here, especially if it is combined with Israeli tourism in India. Because Israeli backpacking to India and Nepal is something of a phenomenon, one that has been written about not only in newspapapers but also academically. There is a section on this in India-Israel relations which is a good start for such an article.

The article is definitely not about the History of Jews in Nepal, and if that is the way it remains, it should certainly be deleted. -- Ravpapa ( talk) 16:44, 26 June 2014 (UTC) reply

• Delete. There is no there there. I looked at this version and all its sources, and what we have are reports from sources of widely varying reliability on one particular recent event, on tourism, and Israli/Jewish travelers. No evidence of anything we could call a "history" of Jews in Nepal at all. Drmies ( talk) 16:57, 26 June 2014 (UTC) reply

• Comment, If we were to look for a related article that is clearly notable we would just need to look south of the Nepali border and consider the History of the Jews in India. There is a substantial content that does not rely on recent news items for inclusion. In comparison the Nepali article goes into great WP:SOAPBOXING length in presenting uncited information on the five times mentioned Chabad. The word appears once in the Indian article with no uncited and repeated mention is made of a non notable Rabbi. Also, when I was in Nepal, none of the Chebad staff seemed that permanent and I was under the impression that the Rabbis moved on as the tourist season came to a close. If we were to look for a related article that is clearly notable we would just need to look south of the Nepali border and consider the History of the Jews in India. There is a substantial content that does not rely on recent news items for inclusion. In comparison the Nepali article goes into great WP:SOAPBOXING length in presenting uncited information on the five times mentioned Chabad. The word appears once in the Indian article with no uncited and repeated mention is made of a non notable Rabbi. Also, when I was in Nepal, none of the Chebad staff seemed that permanent and I was under the impression that the Rabbis moved on as the tourist season came to a close. Genuine and heartwarming stories are now been packed around the Chebad references but its hardly history. Never-the-less, I would like to thank Tomwsulcer for a non confrontational tone. Gregkaye ( talk) 17:44, 26 June 2014 (UTC) reply
• Keep There's enough material here, backed by appropriate reliable and verifiable sources, to meet the notability standard. I look forward to expansion, as mentioned and suggested by other participants here. Alansohn ( talk) 21:19, 26 June 2014 (UTC) reply
  • Alansohn, material for what? You write content, some of it passable (haha!), give me one example of one source that allows us to write something, anything, about "the history of the Jews in Nepal", realizing, of course, that one can't start "history" with a backpacking trip in 1986 or whatever. Seriously. I'm looking at this AfD, and I've looked at those sources, and I'm just flabbergasted that we're even having this discussion with such low-quality material with such inappropriate content. "Jewish tourism in Nepal", that's something that even Colonel Warden could do, but "History of the Jews"?? Without a single source from a book, a peer-reviewed article from a journal on history, without anything more than some tourism sites, a newspaper here and there, a promotional website? Drmies ( talk) 22:38, 26 June 2014 (UTC) reply
  • Or, to put it another way, is there a "Jews in Nepal"? (not the same as a couple of people celebrating passover and a backpacker, or someone meeting a few Jews there while traveling in 2002) Drmies ( talk) 22:40, 26 June 2014 (UTC) reply
• Keep per Tomwsulcer and WP:DONOTDEMOLISH. As Tom correctly pointed out, history is anything that happened in the past. This includes the presence of Jews in Nepal since the 1990s. You may wish to ignore this presence, Ubikwit, but it is there and it is just another stage in the Jewish diaspora. Calling it a "presence" and not a "history", Gregkaye, is pedantic. The largest Passover Seder in the world is held there every year; the history is ongoing. As IZAK points out, further research will likely uncover Jews in the region many hundreds (thousands?) of years ago; there are even opinions that certain tribes in the region descend from the Ten Lost Tribes. One of the purposes of AfD is to bring articles to other editors' attention for the purpose of expansion. This article is a solid start and only needs more research. Yoninah ( talk) 22:47, 26 June 2014 (UTC) reply
• Update from the library--I just got done plowing through all the JSTOR hits I could muster. There is nothing. In other words, there is no "Jews of Nepal", let alone a history of them, and arguing "well a couple of parties in the 1990s, that's history" is hogwash, no matter how much matze was consumed. I mean, that we're basing "History of the Jews in Nepal" on an event to celebrate passover, that's prima facie ridiculous. I mean, absolutely ridiculous.

  There is, however a "Jews of Nepal" in quite a different way, where "Jews" stands for "marginalized group." And you could, of course, base a history on this article--I'd like to see someone bring that into the article; perhaps that's the kind of thing that's up Yoninah's alley. But reliable sources (books, peer-reviewed articles), nothing. And no one here has presented any.

  Now, there is a special relationship between Nepal and Israel, and it starts in 1960--and it may be big enough to write something about, in a dedicated article which is NOT called what this is called. The relevant article is this, Richard J. Kozicki, . "Nepal and Israel: Uniqueness in Asian Relations". Asian Survey (1969) 9.5: 331-42. It's quite interesting. Drmies ( talk) 23:04, 26 June 2014 (UTC) reply

• Delete per Ubikwit and Drmies. First, before you can have a "history of x" article you need to have a "x" article. There isn't an article about Jews in Nepal. Second, there aren't any Jews in Nepal to speak of. There are consular officials and some Chabad officials. Unlike History of the Jews in India that has an actual history of Jewish communities, this has no documented history just contemporary accounts. The equivalent would be writing about the fact that the Italians have a chapel on the grounds of their embassy in Kabul where they have Mass, and call the article "History of Catholicism in Afghanistan." Chris Troutman ( talk) 23:37, 26 June 2014 (UTC) reply
  • Hi Chris Troutman: You obviously didn't do what I did and look at it from the perspective of the Himalayas, Southern China and Northern India that are historically connected and the same as the area of modern-day Nepal. Thanks, IZAK ( talk) 10:48, 27 June 2014 (UTC) reply
• Delete per Drmies and Chris troutman. However, Drmies, I disagree very much with your use of the word "stunt" to describe an annual Passover Seder that regularly brings over 1000 people together. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:22, 27 June 2014 (UTC) reply
  • Sorry about that Cullen. I tweaked, silently, but you'll see it. "Stunt" was in part based on what appeared to be, well, sources that were rather promotional, or not neutral. Thanks, and I am properly chided, Drmies ( talk) 02:34, 27 June 2014 (UTC) reply
• Comment: One interesting thing about this article is that it opens the possibility for a whole new spate of articles about places where there are no Jews, but where there is a Chabad house. History of Jews of Cayman Islands, History of Jews of Cancun, History of Jews of Barranquilla, History of Jews of Kinshasa. You get the idea. -- Ravpapa ( talk) 10:34, 27 June 2014 (UTC) reply
  • Hi Ravpapa, no need to mock, if enough Jews flock around Chabad in any country or location and it thereby gains enough notability then it meets WP requirements regardless whether you do or don't like Chabad. If tens of thousands of Mormons from Utah descended on Nepal it would be notable, and I am sure you would not mock another religious group like this. However, this is about a country not just about Chabad and about a country that has relations with Israel. See the scope of all the countries covered in Category:Jewish history by country that includes small countries as well as large ones, obscure and well-known ones. Thanks, IZAK ( talk) 10:48, 27 June 2014 (UTC) reply
• Note of serious concern: While it is perfectly okay to have vigorous debates in AfDs and ask opposing editors to defend their positions, it is most certainly not appropriate to lace comments with mocking, derogatory and pejorative comments and snide remarks about Jews, the Chabad movement, Passover, what makes Jews notable, that articles about Jews in countries or places are "not valid" because Jews are small in number and "marginal" and a host of other unsavory cracks and sarcasm that begins to reek of anti-Jewish comments (even if those comments come from Jews if directed at other Jews it is a no-no) that then makes it difficult to respond to since no one wants to start a discussion about antisemitism that always becomes a rancorous and self-defeating undertaking. So please those editors who wish to !Vote to delete this article, it is your right, feel free to make your arguments, but you have no right to veer into a mockery of Jews, Jewish Passover rituals, the Chabad people, or other editors who disagree with your own POVs as part of your arguments. Thank you, IZAK ( talk) 11:05, 27 June 2014 (UTC) reply

• I am also surprised by the tone of this discussion. In all my years at Wikipedia, notability as proven by reliable sources has always been the gold standard for articles. This article is based on solid sources and only needs to be expanded, not demolished. (I have put it on my watchlist and will add more sources when I have time next week.) It is totally uncalled-for, for one editor to begin adding more sources during a deletion discussion and for another editor to revert it because IDONTLIKEIT. It is also unconstructive and totally unencyclopedic for an editor to dismiss the largest Passover Seder in the world (that's in The Atlantic, for those of you who aren't clicking on my links) as "a couple of people celebrating passover". Let's look at the verifiability of the article with our eyes, not our hearts. Yoninah ( talk) 11:51, 27 June 2014 (UTC) reply

• The events, even from the 1980's, constitute "history". You can call it "history in the making", or "recent history", but I believe it is certainly "history". A counterargument might characterize the article as being about Israeli tourism or something like that. But is its focus really that narrow? A Passover Seder is specifically Jewish. (A Passover Seder is not specifically Israeli.) The celebration is not of Israeli nationhood. Why aren't the participants celebrating the point at which Israel became a state? Clearly the matzoh and the other elements of the celebration, which are taking place in Nepal, are Jewish in origin. Bus stop ( talk) 12:33, 27 June 2014 (UTC) reply

• Using "history" here is simply incorrect. And if someone brings me some matzoh and we celebrate, my house has not thereby acquired a Jewish history. Drmies ( talk) 02:22, 29 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Drmies wrong analogy, and stop with silly red herrings since you are most definitely not a "country" and no one would come to your house with matza or anything else because you are just an unknown editor on WP with a "user" name, so cut out the stupid jokes please and stick to making good arguments. You can do better, I know! You obviously have never heard of modern history and you obviously do not understand that if a country has Jews living in it for decades, many Jews and some rabbis visiting it for a long time, and established diplomatic relations with the Jewish state of Israel, as well as other older historical connections, then that amounts to the basis of that country's Jewish history. One does not have to wait for major catastrophes, or have gazillions of Jews to be there, to "make history" on the level of "Nixon in Red China"! WP records all manner of history down to the smallest details certainly if as in this case there are minimally sufficient WP:V WP:RS. This is not the place for your POV WP:OR (if it can even be called that, since you insist on making dumb jokes in lieu or proper arguments) "deciding" on your own what does or does not constitute history or Jewish history. Seemingly only if the likes of a Napoloen rides through or rides roughshod over a country then that makes "history" for you but if thousands of Jews and Israelis converge on a country and celebrate one of its holiest holidays that is "not" history. Yaa, IZAK ( talk) 09:41, 29 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Comment: Please note that I have added some information and sources to the article. Perhaps this will change the minds of some of the participants in this discussion. -- Ravpapa ( talk) 06:04, 28 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Comment. Once again, Ubikwit removed content.-- Tomwsulcer ( talk) 16:21, 28 June 2014 (UTC) Would the closing admin please base their assessment on this improved version of History of the Jews in Nepal and not on the whittled down version by Ubikwit.-- Tomwsulcer ( talk) 16:23, 28 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Apparently, the Buddha was a Jew from the Ten lost tribes, or so it has been speculated, according to your source. Right?

Please do not add any more fringe material related to the Ten lost tribes. I suggest you check that Wikipedia article if you have no knowledge on the topic.-- Ubikwit ^連絡 _{見学/迷惑} 16:29, 28 June 2014 (UTC) reply

I have restored information from reliable sources that was removed by previous editors. If it is removed again, I will take this to Arbcom. -- Ravpapa ( talk) 18:58, 28 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Sure ArbCom would be impressed that you restored content that was already restored, so now it is duplicated, while rather blindly ignoring this deletion by Ubikwit.-- Tomwsulcer ( talk) 19:36, 28 June 2014 (UTC) reply

@ Tomwsulcer: See WP:COMPETENCEISREQUIRED.-- Ubikwit ^連絡 _{見学/迷惑} 20:41, 28 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Tomwsulcer is absolutely right, and I am absolutely wrong. The material was not removed, it was only moved and paraphrased. My apologies for being short fused. However, the paraphrased sentences appear in the section on diplomatic relations with Israel, and they have nothing to do with diplomatic relations with Israel. The place for this information is in the lead - well, actually, no, the place is where the entire article should be, in the delete bin. -- Ravpapa ( talk) 02:17, 29 June 2014 (UTC) reply

With regard to Ubikwit's deletion, he is quite right that it is a fringe theory. But, more than that, it has nothing to do with Jews in Nepal. The cited article discusses the people of "Kashmir, west of Nepal". Kashmir is indeed west of Nepal - about 1,000 kilometers west of Nepal. It is completely irrelevant to this article. -- Ravpapa ( talk) 02:33, 29 June 2014 (UTC) reply

https://bits.wikimedia.org/static-1.24wmf10/skins/common/images/button_bold.png

• User:IZAK added the category "Jewish Neaplese History" to the article.

Then User:Tomwsulcer added this to the Jewish diaspora article, and also re-added fringe material.

Can we get an admin to evaluate this thread soon?-- Ubikwit ^連絡 _{見学/迷惑} 12:42, 29 June 2014 (UTC) reply

• Keep. Content therein is reliably sourced and notable. Not opposed to a rename to something that would better reflect the content of the article.-- brew crewer (yada, yada) 16:08, 29 June 2014 (UTC) reply
• Delete per the precedent set by Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bilateral relations of Ireland. The sources used in this article are all either parochial (Chabad work in Nepal does not establish a claim that there is a history that has been seriously studied), or admitted to be non-existent (an article that basically says, "there is no history" is not a encyclopedic inclusion). jps ( talk) 18:07, 29 June 2014 (UTC) reply
• Move. Almost nothing here is really historical, and I see no solid historical sources. However, it's a good discussion of Judaism in Nepal (despite deletion-worthy irrelevancies like the tourist with the starving child), and the tiny historical section works much better as a backdrop/historical background bit for an article about current conditions. Something like Judaism in Nepal would work much better for this article, and if we get a pile of historical information, it can always be split out later. Nyttend ( talk) 19:12, 29 June 2014 (UTC) reply
• Keep or Move/Rename - Has notable content even if there are no native Jews in Nepal. Robert McClenon ( talk) 21:20, 29 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Break, and maybe some new thinking

The article, after additions by Tomwsulcer, is actually beginning to look like something that could be viable. However, it is less and less an article about the history of Jews in Nepal (though it never was such from the beginning). It could be merged into Israel-Nepal Relations. -- Ravpapa ( talk) 12:44, 29 June 2014 (UTC) reply

To what material are your referring, specifically? Birnbaum is fringe, it does not belong in any article on history, and probably not even in the article on the Ten lost tribes, as there are scholarly sources that treat the topic in depth.

A merge sounds like a reasonable idea, but I don't see how the fringe material on the Ten lost tribes could be included.-- Ubikwit ^連絡 _{見学/迷惑} 13:27, 29 June 2014 (UTC) reply

You are being unfair to Birnbaum. He is a serious writer. His reference to the lost tribes theory is a reference, by no means an endorsement (as it is presented here). I personally don't see inclusion of this stuff, as long as it is clear that this is a myth, not a serious scientific theory. -- Ravpapa ( talk) 13:55, 29 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Comment. I have emailed a prominent Jewish history scholar, Isaiah Gafni, who has responded that he will try to help this discussion. In addition, Ubikwit again reverted my contribution, arguing "fringe", when the source -- Birnbaum -- has already been accepted without challenge by contributors on both sides of this debate.-- Tomwsulcer ( talk) 13:08, 29 June 2014 (UTC) reply

That source has never been accepted or even discussed at the article Talk page, so the assertion that it has been "accepted without challenge" is patently false.

Meanwhile, I referred you to the Wikipedia article on the Ten lost tribes, but you seem not to have read it, and instead have inserted quasi-religious fringe material from a source in Hebrew published by a rabbi. Is that correct?

Your reinsertion of assertions regarding speculation that Nepalese are descended from the Ten lost tribes is fringe. Period, full stop. It is speculation based on a pseudohistorical account that has been thoroughly refuted by the preeminent scholars in the field.

I'm going to request that you self-revert the addition.-- Ubikwit ^連絡 _{見学/迷惑} 13:27, 29 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Thread opened here Wikipedia:Fringe_theories/Noticeboard#Fringe_related_to_Ten_lost_tribes.2C_Jewish_origins_of_Nepalese.2C_etc..-- Ubikwit ^連絡 _{見学/迷惑} 13:51, 29 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Are we talking about this source? This was not added by myself but by a user arguing for deletion, namely Ravpapa. After this source was added to the article, along with points it made, the addition was not challenged by yourself or anybody else. The claims it makes are reasonable: that the permanent Jewish community in Nepal is very small; there is a sizeable annual tourist population (20,000 Jews/year); that historically Jewish influence affected the region, by descendants of ancient Jews living there and so forth. This is not fringe material. When there is information which is speculation, it is clearly identified as speculation. When I used this source, which was already there, added by another contributor, an accepted source, to try to improve the article, you reverted it because I added it, that's all; when Ravpapa added it, you didn't revert; when I added it, you do. Is your purpose here to improve the encyclopedia or simply to edit war?-- Tomwsulcer ( talk) 13:59, 29 June 2014 (UTC) reply

That source is not reliable for the "speculative" statement about Nepalese being the descendants of Jewish concubines, particularly in an article purporting to be on history. Is that not readily apparent? I haven't examined why Ravpapa introduced the source, but the statement you have added in another attempt to establish some "ancient history" connection is fringe and I dare say likely to be found offensive by some Nepalese, ad that the statement about the origin of the word Brahmin would be highly offensive to people of the Hindu religion. -- Ubikwit ^連絡 _{見学/迷惑} 15:15, 29 June 2014 (UTC) reply

The problem is not with the reliability of the source, but with what the source says. Birnbaum never presents this hairbrained theory as a real possibility, but as a myth based on Jewish tradition. He never suggests that there is any truth in it. And I must admit, it is an interesting myth, worthy of mentioning as such. -- Ravpapa ( talk) 16:02, 29 June 2014 (UTC) reply

( edit conflict)... See History_of_Hinduism.

Although I've already referred to WP:COMPETENCEISREQUIRED, a couple of other content points that demonstrate a lack of competence on the part of User:Tomwsulcer appear to be in order. Not only is the etymological pseudoscience statement from the fringe source potentially offensive to followers of Hinduism, it demonstrates a lack of linguistics knowledge on the part of the author of the book, let alone the editor that one insert the text. See Indo-European languages.

I'd like to remind Tomwsulcer of WP:NPPA, and ask him to focus on edits, not editors.

Lastly, I've just taken the trouble to check User:Ravpapa's use of the source, which was for uncontroversial simple statements of fact, not introduction of fringe speculation into an article on history.

@ Ravpapa: I don't know how Birnbaum describes the myth or what might make it interesting, but I've read enough about the pseudohistorical accounts related to descent from the Ten lost tribes and the like not to put any credence in anything related. At any rate, I think we both agree that while the myth might be mentionable somewhere on Wikipedia--in the proper context--it does not belong in this article.-- Ubikwit ^連絡 _{見学/迷惑} 15:15, 16:03 29 June 2014 (UTC)

"Note of serious concern": IZAK I completely agree with your stated advice that it is certainly "not appropriate to lace comments with mocking, derogatory and pejorative comments..." I am however a little dismayed that four comments later you used the words "silly" and "stupid" within your own arguments. You had earlier eluded to the issue of equality commenting that "If tens of thousands of Mormons from Utah descended on Nepal it would be notable". I guess that in certain conditions that might be true. If tens of thousands of Mormon men, perhaps dressed in white shirts and dark suits and with name badges showing, were to take the role of visitor to Nepal and then start door-knocking on the local inhabitants or some such then yes people might take note. In this case though I haven't heard any evidence of a local population of Israeli (Jewish) tourists reaching anything near the tens of thousands. Equality, though, is an issue that should clearly gain everyone's support. Everyone should be given equal recognition. Everyone, whether black or gypsy, Jew or Mormon or anything else. There is no difference here. We all bleed the same colour blood. OK. so just suppose that in this case it wasn't a Jewish situation that we were talking about here. Just suppose that it was a team of Christians or people from another religion that went over to Kathmandu and Pokhara. They have a leader. He is of an undisclosed qualification level. He is smartly dressed and yet the only stated thing that is of note about him is that he has gone to Nepal and that he has been awarded an in-house religious title. The group of people arrange occasionally large religious gatherings and these gatherings work within their own religious community. In this case I would not think that such a religious leader should be given their own Wikipedia page. I don't think that the name of the religious organisation should be repeated six times in an article that purporting to be about history. I do however think that it would be a gross misrepresentation to place that information under the heading "Cultural and religious ties". The only ties mentioned in the article seemed to me to be between the Israeli and or Jewish people and an apparently non Israeli facet of the Israeli and Jewish religion. People should be treated equally. I personally think that many representatives of Chabad can be good decent people but this is pretty much what you might expect from many religions. Noone should get special treatment. Gregkaye ( talk) 19:19, 29 June 2014 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.