First of all, great idea. I've been having trouble following a few deletion votes that I've been watching, and this is an ideal solution, putting all my links in one central place. Can I just make a request - can this also include Cfd's as well as Afd's? Many thanks, Nesher 15:20, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
- Not sure - are they individually transcludable? Then, yes. -
CrazyRussian
talk/
email
21:35, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
- The answer is no - so no. Post notes to talk if something is up, but you cannot transclude an individual CfD. - CrazyRussian talk/ email 21:42, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
This AfD has been closed as "merge all" and some merging needs to be done - FYI to the community. Gut Shabbos. - CrazyRussian talk/ email 18:18, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
See here: Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_July_13#Category:Jewish_holy_days_to_Category:Jewish_holidays - CrazyRussian talk/ email 15:54, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
Please see: Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2006 September 19#Liozna and Larger than Life (books). Thank you. IZAK 06:34, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
Please provide your view at Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 October 10#Category:Saintly person tombs in Israel. Thank you. IZAK 03:54, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
Jews in apostasy article needs attention. IZAK 10:50, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Please review the The Seven Worlds article. What is fact and waht is fiction? Anyone know? IZAK 11:07, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
I would vote for deletion. -- Jayrav 16:05, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Articles for deletion/The Seven Worlds
What do you make of this Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Seven Worlds 2? Thanks. IZAK 09:07, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
Those who want to keep think it is Kabbalah. It needs a Golden Dawn, Freemason, or other Christian Hermetic tradition person to deal with it. It has no sources and it is from 2 years ago so I would delete. -- Jayrav 16:45, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
They are not the Seven Worlds of Rabbinics and Kabbalah. See Rashi Psalm:19. -- Jayrav 16:48, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
Ze'ev Smason prodded
- crz crztalk 01:13, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- Strong Delete NN in any way, vanity page, etc..-- Jayrav 02:33, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- There are quite a few vanity pages from pulpit rabbis - most of them should go. They are still NN even if they published a few articles or a book of sermons. --
Jayrav
02:33, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- It's not vanity, dude, it's orchestrated trollism from certain anti-Ner-Yisroel-and-certain-suspected-but-unproven-childmolesting-rabbis pro-MO-antichildabusingrabbi-activist sources. I am guess this dude did something for the antichildabusingrabbi cause... - crz crztalk 02:39, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- The guy may or not be notable per
WP:BIO, but I don't see anything unusual or inappropriate about someone trying to add an article about him. --
Shirahadasha
03:31, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- Me neither... but I indefblocked the adder, anyway... - crz crztalk 04:26, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
Here is another that is NN Shlomo_Porter-- Jayrav 01:31, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
ANd Yaacov Haber AND Levi Brackman And Barry Freundel AND Eli Mansour ANd Yaakov Luban ANd Shraga Simmons And Zvi Block Can people look these over and see if any are worth keeping. Most seem like NN vanity pages for out reach rabbis. I am not going to do anything but they should be looked at. -- Jayrav 01:47, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- BS"D
- R'
Shlomo Porter Is not NN. Gut Voch
- --
Shaul avrom
01:48, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- Porter's ok... -
crz
crztalk
02:04, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- Suggest we not use the word vanity here. It's not vanity to write a good-faith article on someone who simply happens not to be sufficiently notable. As the policy says, "Avoid using the word "vanity" in a deletion discussion — such an accusation may be defamatory. Please assume good faith, and don't bite the newcomers." (emphasis original). Shavuah Tov. -- Shirahadasha 02:49, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- Porter's ok... -
crz
crztalk
02:04, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- BS"D
Thank You. I will avoid vanity and limit it to NN. (Yet, in 1 or 2 of the cases it looks like the Rabbi himself had his resume placed on the web. WOuld that have been a problem?) I have noticed that some fields have criteria for notability. There does not seen to be one for Rabbis. Since I do not know any of the Rabbis involved, do we have any criteria? On the academic and literary pages thay say that having authored a book, or two, is not enough to be notable. -- Jayrav 05:16, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- As usual per WP:BIO, multiple non-trivial independently published works about the person will do. - crz crztalk 05:29, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
I prodded Haber and Brackman. Everyone else looks ok, notability wise, Block is a little shady, and Eli Mansour is quite popular, and though he may fail the multiple non-trivial works test, the wide wide circulation of his tapes is enough I think. But I wish we had a source for the circulation, my knowledge of which is OR. - crz crztalk 05:39, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
I prodded this article. It is a NN yeshivah and the article was written by students there as a sort of forum, check out the talk page. Yesodei_Yisroel Yossiea 15:49, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
Book of Jashar is under Prod
Article definitely needs work, but might be a legitimate topic. Can someone with more specialized knowledge review? Thanks. GRBerry 03:46, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
User:Shirahadasha has created an new article called " Open Orthodoxy" - about a new notion (that is "neither fish nor fowl") recently coined by Rabbi Avi Weiss. After having been asked about it, I attempted to redirect Open Orthodoxy to the Avi Weiss article and post all its content there because on it's own it's a neologism in violation of Wikipedia:Avoid neologisms, but Shirahadasha has reverted my redirect. What do you think should be done, please add your views at Talk:Open Orthodoxy. IZAK 09:24, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
The Christian Rabbi has been taken to DRV here. - crz crztalk 07:10, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
Rabbi Yochanan Zweig prodded
- crz crztalk 02:07, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tanakh (band) - crz crztalk 00:14, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ignatz Lichtenstein (2nd nomination). Thanks. IZAK 10:44, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
See this: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Moshe Aryeh Friedman. Thanks. IZAK 12:51, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Template:Bruchim has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. IZAK 07:34, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
{{ HeBible-stub}} on SfR
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:SFD#.7B.7BHeBible-stub.7D.7D_.E2.86.92_.7B.7BTanakh-stub.7D.7D - crz crztalk 19:40, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
Rabbi Avraham Korman
FYI, I have nominated this article for "prod" - Tragic Baboon ( banana receptacle) 06:37, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
When people remove items, can they please indicate in the edit summary whether it was a keep or a delete.-- Runcorn 21:49, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
This one seems to have gotten by without any serious discussion at all, and IMO, absurd. Can we get all Koran cats to move to Islamic Bible? How can we reopen this CFD? -- Shuki 07:53, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
- Speaking as the nominator, I thought the discussion was suitably thorough, with a variety of viewpoints represented. The relevant process for challenging it would be
WP:DRV. -
Fayenatic london
(talk)
11:36, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
- I also thought the discussion was thorough. — Malik Shabazz ( Talk | contribs) 17:43, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
The empty stuff should be commented out because it is a distraction. People can know there are other places to put stuff by the fact that it is visable once they click edit. If they place it in the wrong section, it can be moved there. It is just wasted space to have it uncommented out, and takes up unnecessary extra space on WP:DRELIGION.-- Sefringle Talk 01:35, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
- The extra space is not a big deal; I don't think that there is anyone would comes to the page and says "woh! what is going on here, there are empty categories. I am so confused and distracted!". Even if the categories are visible when a person clicks edits they won't know to put categories or other deletion stuff on this page in the first place! Also commenting out and uncommenting out every time the section is empty is a needless burden. I agree with you that a page should be aesthetic and not contain extra stuff, but if the empty categories are removed they will certainly fall into disuse.
Jon513
10:01, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
- People don't know. Most see the page and don't click on edit to see the 'code'. It is not taken for granted. -- Shuki 20:09, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
Should AFD related to Jewish culture be on this page. for example Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Appetizing. Jon513 16:00, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
I have commented at ANB. [1] DGG ( talk) 15:34, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- A very distubing development. At the very least least he could have merged the inforamtion into the main Spinka page, or created a new article on the scandal it self. Lobojo ( talk) 15:50, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Seems that User Lysy ( talk · contribs) has just added articles about Jewish Gestapo and a "Rabbi" Abraham Gancwajch who worked with.for the Shomer HaTzair? Is this legit? Sounds very odd and the sources seem POV antisemitic. I redirected Jewish Gestapo to Group 13. See also some of the "funny" discussions at Talk:Tykocin pogrom. IZAK ( talk) 13:22, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Does anyone know what happened here? It was deleted apparently because the ifd closer determined the photo was 'insignificant', even though there was unanimous opinion to 'keep'. Is there any further discussion of this anywhere? any protest? I understand deleting if there is some policy violation, but it appears the deleter trumped the consensus based merely on his/her own opinion which had no support. -- MPerel 21:52, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
- This is the reasoning I gave in the closing. Use of the image in Anne Frank fails WP:NFCC#8. There is no meaningful cited commentary in the article about her ambitions and aspirations that makes this image significant to the article. The one line that says she dreamed about becoming an actress is not enough make the image significant. The image fails WP:NFCC#3a as the image in the infobox already provides identification of the subject of the article in the same time frame. - Nv8200p talk 22:59, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
All of a sudden, 2 users: BasketofPuppies and User:ConcernedVancouverite have been marking several pages about synagogues all over the USA, for deletion. This has attracted several other users to help source the pages and expand them. What I don't understand is that, these same users who mark these places of worship for deletion continue to do it, even on pages that are sourced and have some notability, and they don't give anyone a chance to help improve it. I think these two hate synagogues. Tinton5 ( talk) 16:47, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
- They probably just hate bad articles.
Chesdovi (
talk)
16:51, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
- Can someone give a sense as to how all of their AfDs turn out? If they mostly result in deletions, I for one would not be troubled. If the nominations for deletion generally do not result in deletion, however, I would have a different view.-- Epeefleche ( talk) 20:49, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
I have deleted a few links of closed discussions from the page, and in doing so I might have interrupted User:AnomieBOT in archiving them into Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Judaism/archive. I may have done it on the WikiProject Deletion sorting/Israel as well... What should I do/should be done? Also, I think the page should be renamed into "WikiProject Deletion sorting/Judaism and Jews". Does anyone agree? Thanks, Shalom11111 ( talk) 12:50, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
- Hi Shalom11111. AnomieBOT only deletes AfD discussions, not CfD discussions. I also think the page name should be left alone, because this page fits in a superstructure of religion-related deletion sorting pages. — Malik Shabazz Talk/ Stalk 16:07, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
First of all, great idea. I've been having trouble following a few deletion votes that I've been watching, and this is an ideal solution, putting all my links in one central place. Can I just make a request - can this also include Cfd's as well as Afd's? Many thanks, Nesher 15:20, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
- Not sure - are they individually transcludable? Then, yes. -
CrazyRussian
talk/
email
21:35, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
- The answer is no - so no. Post notes to talk if something is up, but you cannot transclude an individual CfD. - CrazyRussian talk/ email 21:42, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
This AfD has been closed as "merge all" and some merging needs to be done - FYI to the community. Gut Shabbos. - CrazyRussian talk/ email 18:18, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
See here: Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_July_13#Category:Jewish_holy_days_to_Category:Jewish_holidays - CrazyRussian talk/ email 15:54, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
Please see: Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2006 September 19#Liozna and Larger than Life (books). Thank you. IZAK 06:34, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
Please provide your view at Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 October 10#Category:Saintly person tombs in Israel. Thank you. IZAK 03:54, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
Jews in apostasy article needs attention. IZAK 10:50, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Please review the The Seven Worlds article. What is fact and waht is fiction? Anyone know? IZAK 11:07, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
I would vote for deletion. -- Jayrav 16:05, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Articles for deletion/The Seven Worlds
What do you make of this Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Seven Worlds 2? Thanks. IZAK 09:07, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
Those who want to keep think it is Kabbalah. It needs a Golden Dawn, Freemason, or other Christian Hermetic tradition person to deal with it. It has no sources and it is from 2 years ago so I would delete. -- Jayrav 16:45, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
They are not the Seven Worlds of Rabbinics and Kabbalah. See Rashi Psalm:19. -- Jayrav 16:48, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
Ze'ev Smason prodded
- crz crztalk 01:13, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- Strong Delete NN in any way, vanity page, etc..-- Jayrav 02:33, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- There are quite a few vanity pages from pulpit rabbis - most of them should go. They are still NN even if they published a few articles or a book of sermons. --
Jayrav
02:33, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- It's not vanity, dude, it's orchestrated trollism from certain anti-Ner-Yisroel-and-certain-suspected-but-unproven-childmolesting-rabbis pro-MO-antichildabusingrabbi-activist sources. I am guess this dude did something for the antichildabusingrabbi cause... - crz crztalk 02:39, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- The guy may or not be notable per
WP:BIO, but I don't see anything unusual or inappropriate about someone trying to add an article about him. --
Shirahadasha
03:31, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- Me neither... but I indefblocked the adder, anyway... - crz crztalk 04:26, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
Here is another that is NN Shlomo_Porter-- Jayrav 01:31, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
ANd Yaacov Haber AND Levi Brackman And Barry Freundel AND Eli Mansour ANd Yaakov Luban ANd Shraga Simmons And Zvi Block Can people look these over and see if any are worth keeping. Most seem like NN vanity pages for out reach rabbis. I am not going to do anything but they should be looked at. -- Jayrav 01:47, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- BS"D
- R'
Shlomo Porter Is not NN. Gut Voch
- --
Shaul avrom
01:48, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- Porter's ok... -
crz
crztalk
02:04, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- Suggest we not use the word vanity here. It's not vanity to write a good-faith article on someone who simply happens not to be sufficiently notable. As the policy says, "Avoid using the word "vanity" in a deletion discussion — such an accusation may be defamatory. Please assume good faith, and don't bite the newcomers." (emphasis original). Shavuah Tov. -- Shirahadasha 02:49, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- Porter's ok... -
crz
crztalk
02:04, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- BS"D
Thank You. I will avoid vanity and limit it to NN. (Yet, in 1 or 2 of the cases it looks like the Rabbi himself had his resume placed on the web. WOuld that have been a problem?) I have noticed that some fields have criteria for notability. There does not seen to be one for Rabbis. Since I do not know any of the Rabbis involved, do we have any criteria? On the academic and literary pages thay say that having authored a book, or two, is not enough to be notable. -- Jayrav 05:16, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- As usual per WP:BIO, multiple non-trivial independently published works about the person will do. - crz crztalk 05:29, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
I prodded Haber and Brackman. Everyone else looks ok, notability wise, Block is a little shady, and Eli Mansour is quite popular, and though he may fail the multiple non-trivial works test, the wide wide circulation of his tapes is enough I think. But I wish we had a source for the circulation, my knowledge of which is OR. - crz crztalk 05:39, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
I prodded this article. It is a NN yeshivah and the article was written by students there as a sort of forum, check out the talk page. Yesodei_Yisroel Yossiea 15:49, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
Book of Jashar is under Prod
Article definitely needs work, but might be a legitimate topic. Can someone with more specialized knowledge review? Thanks. GRBerry 03:46, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
User:Shirahadasha has created an new article called " Open Orthodoxy" - about a new notion (that is "neither fish nor fowl") recently coined by Rabbi Avi Weiss. After having been asked about it, I attempted to redirect Open Orthodoxy to the Avi Weiss article and post all its content there because on it's own it's a neologism in violation of Wikipedia:Avoid neologisms, but Shirahadasha has reverted my redirect. What do you think should be done, please add your views at Talk:Open Orthodoxy. IZAK 09:24, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
The Christian Rabbi has been taken to DRV here. - crz crztalk 07:10, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
Rabbi Yochanan Zweig prodded
- crz crztalk 02:07, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tanakh (band) - crz crztalk 00:14, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ignatz Lichtenstein (2nd nomination). Thanks. IZAK 10:44, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
See this: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Moshe Aryeh Friedman. Thanks. IZAK 12:51, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Template:Bruchim has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. IZAK 07:34, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
{{ HeBible-stub}} on SfR
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:SFD#.7B.7BHeBible-stub.7D.7D_.E2.86.92_.7B.7BTanakh-stub.7D.7D - crz crztalk 19:40, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
Rabbi Avraham Korman
FYI, I have nominated this article for "prod" - Tragic Baboon ( banana receptacle) 06:37, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
When people remove items, can they please indicate in the edit summary whether it was a keep or a delete.-- Runcorn 21:49, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
This one seems to have gotten by without any serious discussion at all, and IMO, absurd. Can we get all Koran cats to move to Islamic Bible? How can we reopen this CFD? -- Shuki 07:53, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
- Speaking as the nominator, I thought the discussion was suitably thorough, with a variety of viewpoints represented. The relevant process for challenging it would be
WP:DRV. -
Fayenatic london
(talk)
11:36, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
- I also thought the discussion was thorough. — Malik Shabazz ( Talk | contribs) 17:43, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
The empty stuff should be commented out because it is a distraction. People can know there are other places to put stuff by the fact that it is visable once they click edit. If they place it in the wrong section, it can be moved there. It is just wasted space to have it uncommented out, and takes up unnecessary extra space on WP:DRELIGION.-- Sefringle Talk 01:35, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
- The extra space is not a big deal; I don't think that there is anyone would comes to the page and says "woh! what is going on here, there are empty categories. I am so confused and distracted!". Even if the categories are visible when a person clicks edits they won't know to put categories or other deletion stuff on this page in the first place! Also commenting out and uncommenting out every time the section is empty is a needless burden. I agree with you that a page should be aesthetic and not contain extra stuff, but if the empty categories are removed they will certainly fall into disuse.
Jon513
10:01, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
- People don't know. Most see the page and don't click on edit to see the 'code'. It is not taken for granted. -- Shuki 20:09, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
Should AFD related to Jewish culture be on this page. for example Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Appetizing. Jon513 16:00, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
I have commented at ANB. [1] DGG ( talk) 15:34, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- A very distubing development. At the very least least he could have merged the inforamtion into the main Spinka page, or created a new article on the scandal it self. Lobojo ( talk) 15:50, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Seems that User Lysy ( talk · contribs) has just added articles about Jewish Gestapo and a "Rabbi" Abraham Gancwajch who worked with.for the Shomer HaTzair? Is this legit? Sounds very odd and the sources seem POV antisemitic. I redirected Jewish Gestapo to Group 13. See also some of the "funny" discussions at Talk:Tykocin pogrom. IZAK ( talk) 13:22, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Does anyone know what happened here? It was deleted apparently because the ifd closer determined the photo was 'insignificant', even though there was unanimous opinion to 'keep'. Is there any further discussion of this anywhere? any protest? I understand deleting if there is some policy violation, but it appears the deleter trumped the consensus based merely on his/her own opinion which had no support. -- MPerel 21:52, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
- This is the reasoning I gave in the closing. Use of the image in Anne Frank fails WP:NFCC#8. There is no meaningful cited commentary in the article about her ambitions and aspirations that makes this image significant to the article. The one line that says she dreamed about becoming an actress is not enough make the image significant. The image fails WP:NFCC#3a as the image in the infobox already provides identification of the subject of the article in the same time frame. - Nv8200p talk 22:59, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
All of a sudden, 2 users: BasketofPuppies and User:ConcernedVancouverite have been marking several pages about synagogues all over the USA, for deletion. This has attracted several other users to help source the pages and expand them. What I don't understand is that, these same users who mark these places of worship for deletion continue to do it, even on pages that are sourced and have some notability, and they don't give anyone a chance to help improve it. I think these two hate synagogues. Tinton5 ( talk) 16:47, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
- They probably just hate bad articles.
Chesdovi (
talk)
16:51, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
- Can someone give a sense as to how all of their AfDs turn out? If they mostly result in deletions, I for one would not be troubled. If the nominations for deletion generally do not result in deletion, however, I would have a different view.-- Epeefleche ( talk) 20:49, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
I have deleted a few links of closed discussions from the page, and in doing so I might have interrupted User:AnomieBOT in archiving them into Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Judaism/archive. I may have done it on the WikiProject Deletion sorting/Israel as well... What should I do/should be done? Also, I think the page should be renamed into "WikiProject Deletion sorting/Judaism and Jews". Does anyone agree? Thanks, Shalom11111 ( talk) 12:50, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
- Hi Shalom11111. AnomieBOT only deletes AfD discussions, not CfD discussions. I also think the page name should be left alone, because this page fits in a superstructure of religion-related deletion sorting pages. — Malik Shabazz Talk/ Stalk 16:07, 25 April 2014 (UTC)