Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Magen Lacholeh

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 Delete both. Unfortunately, the lack of reliable sources necessitates deletion. Thank you, Fang Aili talk 18:54, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Magen Lacholeh

Magen Lacholeh (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

No external sources, no assertion of notability per WP:ORG, reads like an advertisement. Google search did not reveal any secondary sources Derwig 07:13, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

I am also nominating the related page, founder and head of the organization, again no assertion of WP:BIO and no secondary sources cited or available:

Benjamin Fisher (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
  • Keep. I can't understand why you're suggesting deletion of such a well known and respected org, when a simple search on google reveals over 900 sources (see: Google [1] and [2]). The same applies to Rabbi Fisher, who is a well known personality in Israel. You should do some more research before such extreme tagging. The structure of this page is comparable to Ezra LeMarpeh, so you should equally tag that page. Dandin 15:00, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
    • The existence of an article on a similar organization is irrelevant ,see WP:WAX. The google hits do not serve to assert notability. None of them are from reliable secondary sources, see Primary criterion at WP:ORG and WP:Bio. If adequate sources (e.g coverage in national media) are available, please go ahead and improve the articles. Derwig 15:21, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete 12 ghits within .il does not tend to support the idea that the organization is that important. There seem to be too few sources to write a balanced article. --Dhartung | Talk 17:36, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
    • Why ignore the 929 ghits in hebrew? I'm working to update the current text with adequate sources as Derwig suggested. Dandin 19:54, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Articles Rewritten. Added many refs in compliance with guidelines cited by Derwig -- Dandin 19:57, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
    • (A copy of a reply on my talk page- Almost all of the sources added by you are from local or community papers, not satisfactory secondary sources (national coverage). Most of them include only a passing reference to the organization. To top it all, they are scanned paper clips, hosted on Magen Lachole website, which brings up the question of WP:COI. Looking at the articles as they stand now, I do not think they should be kept. They read like an advertisement, with abundant peacok terms. IMO, you have not yet satisfied notability, and the promotional tone is inappropriate for an encyclopedia article. Derwig 16:29, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
    • The primary criterion for notability is if the organization has been the subject of coverage in secondary sources (Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)). The referenced (non-exhaustive) list of sources includes more than enough in-depth (inter)national and reliable press coverage to establish notability. The fact that scans of the paper sources appear on the organization's website does not diminish their credibility or create a bias, rather adds to their verifiability. Even without the scans the references would be valid. If the page's structure or references can be improved, this should be solved through regular editing, rather than deletion, see WP:ATD#ATD. Jumping straight to deletion is not fair to other editors nor constructive for this encyclopedia. — Dandin 18:27, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
      • (Following two comments copied from Derwig's talk page)
      • Note: it's not my org, I sit far away from Israel, just trying to write facts about a well known organization that has helped many people I know. — Dandin 20:38, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
      • Looks better now, with the rewording (now that the abyss is gone...) -- Derwig 20:42, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete as there is no verifiability in the English language by reliable, independent secondary soucres. A casual look at the Ghits reveals less than 40 English sites; the only English-language sources cited in the article have nominal mentions of the organization. Is there anything in Google News? Bearian 16:50, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
The Benjamin Fisher article must also be speedily deleted, as there is no proof he even exists from any English-language secondary sources, as the article is currently written and sourced. Bearian 16:54, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
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.