Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rabbi Dr. Stuart Dauermann

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 -- Y not? 02:58, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rabbi Dr. Stuart Dauermann


Rabbi Dr. Stuart Dauermann (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Linked from some articles I speedied. Are the assertions made here enough to establish notability? Daniel Case 03:06, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletions. —Yeshivish 07:19, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Not notable to me. No reliable sources outside of blogs and special interest web sites. MarkBul 04:22, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
I have added reliable third party outside sources--יודל 20:45, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
I have added reliable third party outside sources--יודל 20:45, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per MarkBul --Yeshivish 07:21, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
I have added reliable third party outside sources--יודל 20:45, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete - perhaps even speedy I don't see a claim to notability. They aren't multiple independent third party sources. Jon513 12:58, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
They may be messianic sites, this does still make them reliable and third party to show that he is prominent among them and a leading figure in their ranks. I think WP:Notability does not mean if you know him or not, this subject is Notable for thousands of people just make a Google search on his name its spread out along tens of result pages, which don't identify themselves as Messianic.--יודל 20:45, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Being a rabbi and a member of some organizations does not equal notability. Chesdovi 17:28, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
But he is also a professor and also a leading figure in his denomination. So he is more then just a Rabbi--יודל 20:45, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Yet being a synagogue that was started in 2005 makes something notable enough for an article? I think Chesdovi's real goal is to make sure wikipedia has article content heavy with what he feels are "real" Jews, and ignoring the "fake" Jews.Johnpacklambert 04:53, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletions. -- Pete.Hurd 18:07, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
  • 'Weak Delete' changed, see below. he is not notable as an academic, having no significant publications or academic positions. As a religious leader it might depend on the notability of the organizations. Being head of a really major synagogue or church might well be considered notable. DGG (talk) 23:52, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
I have added a major work of his published by a university's website, please look in the outside links section for this--יודל 20:51, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom and others. IZAK 14:01, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep Google Search tells me of tens of pages of results where his name is prominently mentioned as a huge figure in his circles, so He is Notable by all means. He is a leader in a lot of messianic groups and institutions. Look at what links here and see how many wikipedia articles note and link to this name, I would urge all not to be influenced by this number of overwhelming delete votes since it was raised on the Jewish Wiki-Project it has arisen the voice of a few POV, but this does not mirror any real neutral users who are simply not alerted to this delete attempt. --יודל 14:05, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom--Miamite 14:29, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete, can't find any reliable sources about him, only blogs and private websites mention him. --MPerel 15:48, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
What do u mean by private websites? those websites arnt at all the subjects private property, they may like the subject greatly and this tells u that he is notable amongst them, No claim in this article is based on sites that will lie openly they are university, business and all kinds of interest sites.--יודל 20:58, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete, per MPerel. I haven't done any searching to verify notability, but the article does need third-party references. If all you need is someone's autobiography (it's from his website), then I'll just go assure my own place on Wikipedia by writing something on my website. (Did you know I invented bread and am the first person to visit Mars?) What is said may be true, but an objective source is needed. If this is addressed, then I'd vote weak keep as I'm unsure that being president of a (relatively small) organization meets WP:NOTE. From the article, he doesn't appear particularly notable as a musician, academic, or clergy—maybe meriting a footnote in the article for the group he is associated with in those respects. ⇔ ChristTrekker 17:46, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
    I am addressing your concerns and already have linked to outside sources, please help me out in this task of considering which more claims u need sources on, also please consider that his Notability factor is not only on being a rabbi pastor or musician his main prominence is that he is a leading figure in the messianic movement, and if this is true as i have started adding sources that they do consider him their leader, then he is notable--יודל 21:03, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
    Good (and very prompt) work, יודל. Changing vote to weak keep/merge, per convincing rationale given by Jamie Guinn, Wikijeff, and DGG. ⇔ ChristTrekker 14:47, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge with Union of Messianic Jewish Congregations in the Hashivenu section (that page is also up for deletion, but I tend to think that this information can be helpful if combined in one place). The.helping.people.tick 22:14, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete No indication of sufficient notability for wikipedia Avi 17:52, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Hundrets of Google results are indeed sufficient notability for wikipedia--יודל 21:06, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
No, they are not. See WP:GHITS. I know plenty of subjects with thousands or hundreds of thousands of results that would make horrible articles on Wikipedia --lucid 21:28, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Yes indeed Google wont correct a badly written article, but it sure shows u how notable a subject is. And this subject has hundreds of Google results so it is the perfect example of somebody who is noteble. Last time i checked this was explicitly written in that link u provided.--יודל 21:38, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Did you, by chance, read the link? It clearly says a large number of hits on a search engine are no guarantee that the subject is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia. -- Again, several hundred isn't notable at all, I can think of things with several THOUSAND that do not meet our notability policies. I highly recommend you read WP:BIO, and read WP:GHITS (again) --lucid 00:02, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
I will be so kind and ask u for only one link where an article has hundreds of google results and it is still not Notable, Please do provide your example and let all see what to do here.--יודל 00:12, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
(undent) Gladly. Nearly 60,000 GHITS. Deleted six times. Over 86k GHITS. Deleted ten times, including an AFD. And again, WP:GHITS makes this very clear, notability does NOT depend on GHITS either way, as GHITS are very unreliable for anything but a very rough judgement --lucid 00:50, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Yossiea (talk) 19:05, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep - as noted in the article, the subject has had music published in at least four music collections, and has been a speaker at at least one academic conference at Fuller Seminary. The fact that he is also a minister and regular contributor to the online Kesher Journal at www.kesherjournal.com, which seems to be one of the movements primary publications, does I believe serve as sufficient basis for the claim of notability. John Carter 00:00, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Merge (changed vote to allow content merged with UMJC). Hell must have really frozen over today. The content could be notable, but if notable, again like other article it would be more appropriately merged with UMJC, and certainly with not as much content as this stand alone article. I suggest contributors to MJ articles visit the Wikiproject Messianic Judaism page to get started in posting ideas for articles for MJ editor review so these AfDs by other editors don't discourage sincere editors from future contributions. inigmatus 00:06, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
    Maybe WP:MESSIANIC needs its own deletion sorting subsection? Makes sense that every WikiProject should have one, so that deletions are brought to the attention of the correct people. ⇔ ChristTrekker 14:47, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Very Weak Keep or Merge. I have to agree with Inigmatus. Dauermann could be notable enough to mention in the main article on the UMJC. When you compare him to such leaders in the movement, like Boaz Michael (who not only writes but puts out tons of published works and is gaining quite a bit of notarity), who don't even have articles on Wiki I could understand why Dauermann may not warrant a separate article just yet. Jamie Guinn 00:20, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep or Merge. Because he is a leader in the modern Messianic movement, especially given his published and public speaking status, I think he's notable. Those who are quick to cast a Delete NN reference should understand that unlike mainstream Christianity or mainstream Judaism the Messianic movement is a comparatively small religious movement. It's relative size should be taken into account before hastily coming to a decision. Indeed, forethought ahead of haste should be preferred when dealing with entries for most minority religion articles contained in Wikipedia. However, I do understand that the article is a bit sparse. If it cannot be expanded, it should be merged into another article so that the information contained is not lost from Wikipedia. —Wikijeff 00:45, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak keep (changed !vote) There is a problem with articles where the sources that exist are not likely to be the usual sort of mainstream 3rd party RSs we rely on for notability. this affects all sorts of subjects--video games, small revolutionary movements, obscure academics outside the western tradition, and leaders in small religious groups. I think we need to make allowances, and consider notability shown if there is some reasonable evidence that the person is important within their field, however their field does things. before the modern era, I do not think the sources for this article really meet the usual standard, but they do give the impression that he is influential and important in his field. Certainly we should keep the basic policies, but how e interpret them can be adjusted by judgment to fit circumstances, especially in order to ensure balanced coverage. DGG (talk) 03:39, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep there are people who have advocated deletion who are Yeshivah grads. This seems to me to just be an attempt to supress knowedge that Jews voluntarily converted to Christianity. It seems the attempts at edditing are more motivated by religious biases than proper editorial considerations.Johnpacklambert 04:51, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
    Potential conflict noted. ⇔ ChristTrekker 14:47, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep - this appears to be a POV promoted deletion attempt. In his arena of Messianic activity Dauremann is very prominent and referencing has been added on this. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 13:38, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
    Potential conflict noted. ⇔ ChristTrekker 14:47, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. Non-notable bio. Keb25 11:32, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. Notability hinges on notability of hashivenu, which is little more than a website. Otherwise a community rabbi. JFW | T@lk 14:37, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
  • (Copied from the articles talk page--יודל 14:58, 7 September 2007 (UTC)) KEEP This man is one of perhaps the two most influential men in the Messianic Jewish movement. He has his hands in everything, and is as the forefront of all the watershed changes going on. He travels all over the country to speak and his name is all over the web.GracieRuth 14:51, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
FULL DISCLOSURE - GracieRuth (talk · contribs) is the creator of Stuart Dauermann, Hashivenu‎, and Messianic Jewish Theological Institute -- 159.182.1.4 22:00, 7 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.