Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Messianic Jewish Rabbinical Council

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. To be completely clear, I am discounting somewhat the "numbers" argument here - I think that there is a reasonable consensus that the page should be deleted. Further, several users who expressed a "keep" opinion seem to have had little to no contributions outside this topic, and I have marked them as such besides their comments in this discussion, especially because of the possibility of sock puppetry. Nihiltres(t.l) 16:03, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Messianic Jewish Rabbinical Council

Messianic Jewish Rabbinical Council (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Unsourced (independant sources) unnoteable organazation. Google searches return scant WP mirror sites. Yeshivish 03:14, 6 September 2007 (UTC) *Delete per above. --Yeshivish 03:19, 6 September 2007 (UTC) Blocked sockpupetear.

  • Delete unless significant coverage from reliable, independent sources are found Corpx 05:04, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete - article fails to establish notability. Gatoclass 06:02, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete, there appears to be no reliable sources verifying this organization actually exists, much less showing it is notable enough to warrant an article. --MPerel 06:43, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete There are a great number of small organizations like this one. None of them seem to agree with each other enough to join forces and make one large organization. They all seem to want to be leaders, and none of them want to risk giving leadership authority to anyone else. None of these organizations has had a significant impact on anyone outside their own small circles. That's why they tend to be non-notable, like this one. OfficeGirl 07:43, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete as per above. Yossiea (talk) 17:03, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
  • KEEP The organization plays a vital role for what they do although they are not very well known to the general public. Their web site link is one the page. Contact them using the web form if you think they are not who they claim to be. I see no Messianic group coming here to refute their page. They themselves are the reliable source. They know who they are.IndependentConservative 18:32, 6 September 2007 (UTC) — IndependentConservative (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • Comment It's not a question of whether or not the article is a hoax. It's a question of whether or not they meet this guideline for notability. They don't appear to. If you have reliable sources that suggest otherwise, please add them to the article. Best, --Bfigura (talk) 22:57, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment The guidelines are not "set in stone", as is noted within them. This organization should be listed.IndependentConservative 01:01, 8 September 2007 (UTC) — IndependentConservative (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • Delete. Non-notable organisation. Keb25 22:46, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete for lack of notability and verifiability. --Bfigura (talk) 22:51, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Do Not Delete This article is the target of an organized attempt to expunge all Messianic articles from Wikipedia by people who just don't like Messianics. RabbiAdam 23:00, 6 September 2007 — RabbiAdam (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • Delete per nom. IZAK 06:31, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep if we would require external third party links from all the main stream Jewish articles, it would be fare to ask here as well for third party links. If this gets deleted simply because the main stream Jews r dismissing this article in our open POV agenda against Messianic articles how could we claim that we are a neutral encyclopedia?!--יודל 11:25, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
  • (copied from the subject's talk page--יודל 14:12, 7 September 2007 (UTC) ) KEEP -- the organization is a watershed for the messianic movementGracieRuth 14:06, 7 September 2007 (UTC) — GracieRuth (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • Delete per nom. Smokizzy (talk) 14:40, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Avi 15:57, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment Wikipedia requires independent reliable sources sufficient to verify basic information about articles and establish that the subject is notable. Let's not get distracted from these basic Wikipedia requirements. I believe these requirements are somewhat, but not completely, modified for religious organizations. We can rely on a religious organization's own sources for statements about matters such as what they believe and who their leadership is. But we can't rely on a religious organization's own sources for proof that the organization is itself notable. We need outside sources to show that. If, as GracieRuth says, "the organization is a watershed for the messianic movement", doubtless people will have talked about it and sources shouldn't be difficult to find. Best, --Shirahadasha 05:35, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

*Delete per nom.--Miamite 08:35, 9 September 2007 (UTC) this user is the same as user yeshivish--יודל 13:48, 24 September 2007 (UTC) *Delete per Yeshivish--Truest blue 17:40, 9 September 2007 (UTC) this user is also user yeshivish--יודל 13:48, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

  • 'Merge to Union of Messianic Jewish Congregations, the parent organization. I don't find evidence of independent notability. GRBerry 03:33, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak delete I'd modify the standard a little further than Shirahadasha--the only way to avoid bias is to include any religious organisation with a real existence and any demonstration of notability--but there is no third party sources for this at all. Np bias against re-creation if something is found. DGG (talk) 03:45, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
  • KEEP —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.171.207.45 (talk) 18:28, 10 September 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.