Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Judaism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

See also: Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Israel
See also: Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Religion
 Points of interest related to Judaism on Wikipedia 
Portal - Category - WikiProject - Stubs - Deletions
Shortcuts:
WP:DJEW
WP:DELJEW

Contents
Deletion Sorting
Project
Project page (talk)
Lists (by ABC)
Lists (by topic)
AfD: Today, Yesterday
edit · changes

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Judaism. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting.

You can help maintain the list on this page:

  • To add a new AfD discussion (once it has already been opened on WP:AFD):
  • Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
  • You can also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Judaism}}<small>—~~~~</small> to it, which will inform users that it has been listed here.
  • There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
  • Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
  • You can also add and remove links to other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Judaism.

Please note that adding an AfD to, or removing it from, this page does not add it to, or remove it from, the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page, before adding it to this page.

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.


Archive Relevant archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Judaism/archive.
Purge page cache Watch this page
Deletion discussions
Deletion today

Deletion yesterday

Articles (by category)

Templates

Images & media

Categories (active)

User categories

Stub types

Redirects

Miscellany

Deletion review
Deletion policy
Process - log - tools

Guide - Admin guide


[edit] Judaism

[edit] Mordechai Becher

Mordechai Becher (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

This is the third of three new biographies [1] [2] [3] about the small full-time staff of an Orthodox Jewish organization called Gateways that has about four or five full time rabbis working for it. The article about its founder was nominated for deletion for not being notable beyond creating the organization. Another article about one of its rabbis was then nominated for deletion for Wikipedia:Content forking, failing Wikipedia:Notability (people) and a violation of WP:NOTADVERTISING. The same goes for the present article because it's about an Orthodox rabbi who is advertised as being "notable" having served in the Israeli army and is a popular speaker among the newly-religious. These criteria are not enough to establish notability. To his credit he has written a few books geared to newly-religious Jews, but such literature is also very widespread and such authors are not regarded as notable writers as these writings are mostly collections of their pep talks. This biography, like those of the other two rabbis, should be part of the organization (Gateways) that these rabbis have for many years created, served, and will be serving, as matters stand, and the biography/ies should be deleted and all their content merged into the main Gateways article. (Note, Wikipedia does not have and has avoided having "biographies" about every last outreach rabbi associated with Chabad, Aish HaTorah and Ohr Somayach all of whom can be "cited" as doing the exact same things Rabbi Becher does, and he is no exception.) IZAK (talk) 06:46, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

  • Delete and Redirect and move all material to the main Gateways article. IZAK (talk) 06:46, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletion discussions. IZAK (talk) 06:55, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep
    • Gateways is an organization. Rabbi Becher works for Gateways. Gateways employs less than 50 full-time professionals and staff members. So yes, Rabbi Becher will be at the forefront of Gateways. However, Rabbi Becher exists independantly from Gateways, as do the other rabbis whose articles are being questioned on the basis of frivolously false assertions and subjective, disparate remarks. He is the author of, as cited, critically acclaimed, wildly popular texts and lectures that are delivered throughout the United States and internationally as well -- this is not forking of a single unit but elaboration of two separate, distinct and substantial entities.
    • Citations have been provided for Rabbi Becher being world reknowned, internationally popular and having written critically acclaimed, instant hit texts - he is clearly notable.
    • This is not advertising any more than any other article of any other celebrity who is famous because something he or she writes, says, fabricates, manufactures or thinks about has been put into commercially viable "packaging" and sold for profit.
    • Your premise for this AfD is similarly invalid -- Delete, redirect and move is incomprehensible. If we delete and redirect, what are we moving? You mean to merge this article, for which this is an inproper forum. This is for deleting articles that do not merit existence based on violations of Wikipedia policy, such as lack of notability, lack of encyclopedic content or copyright violation. None of these apply, and your very admission that you recommend redirect attests to your lack of precision in generating this AfD.
    • To his credit he has written a few books geared to newly-religious Jews, but such literature is also very widespread and such authors are not regarded as notable writers as these writings are mostly collections of their pep talks
Do you have citations to support your subjective assertion that this type of writing is widespread, and so widespread that authors are not notable even when they are the most sought after speakers in Jewish outreach? Do you have a source to support your subjective assertion that these writers, who are so sought out to be considered the most sought out in the country, are not notable because their writings are merely collections of their highly inspirational talks? Your disparaging remarks and poor use of words to describe both this and the other rabbis and related items is evidence of your lack of sensitivity for the subjects and topics covered by these articles -- perhaps you should refrain from making statements about them or recommending them for deletion, or deletion and redirection or even deletion, redirection and moving (whatever that means).
There are no "disparagements." Stick to the arguments. The fact that he writes some texts for ArtScroll is proof enough for you and anyone, since almost all of their non-textual Judaica in English is for outreach and the newly-observant. IZAK (talk) 07:38, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
The clever inclusion of information regarding other articles and other people is a deliberate scheme to tie all articles I have recently started together to substantiate deletion or merge of one based on the merits or lack thereof of another. The excessive bolding of words used primarily for voting can be interpreted as a clear violation of unspoken voting rules, with the potential of overly affecting the votes of future voters by falsely giving the impression that there is more substantial support for a particular type of vote based on the times the bolded word appears in the vote discussion. DRosenbach (Talk | Contribs) 07:07, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
There is no scheme and no extra voting and my Wikipedia writing style is fine so kindly lower your tones and accusations and of red herring arguments and stick to the discussions at hand. The fact remains that you chose to create four articles for one subject (Gateways) when one (Gateways) would have sufficed. The fact that right off the bat you chose to create separate brochure-like articles about a single organization and its three top rabbis, all of whom either founded and have worked full-time for that organzation for well on a decade, runs smack into problems of violating WP:NOTADVERTISING; WP:NOTMYSPACE; WP:NOT#WEBHOST and also WP:NPOV since you seem to be focusing on their work which you regard as important without providing any alternate and critical views at any time, and it may be, but to create four articles about one organization that then forks into articles about its three top rabbis reveals a clear problem of a POV slide in their favor. Therefore uniting all four articles into the one main Gateways article is the logical and balanced solution at this time. IZAK (talk) 07:36, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Jonathan Rietti

Jonathan Rietti (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

Merge and Redirect to the Gateways article because he has been its leading lecturer almost since its founding and it his been his base and "claim to fame" so that this article not be a violation of Wikipedia:Content forking. Also fails Wikipedia:Notability (people) as a serious rabbi. Also seems to be a violation WP:NOTADVERTISING. (See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mordechai Suchard about Gateways' founder in this regard.) IZAK (talk) 07:44, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

  • Merge and Redirect to Gateways article for above reasons. IZAK (talk) 07:44, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletion discussions. IZAK (talk) 07:46, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment if all you want is a merge and not deletion, it doesn't need to be brought to AfD. Do the merge and close this discussion. TravellingCarithe Busy Bee 13:00, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep - I contest your recommendation on the following basis:
    • Rabbi Rietti is surely a candidate for notability, and I assert that this notability is independant of his ties to Gateways. He may happen to be a senior lecturer for the organization, but his affilitation with it has merely increased public awareness of his existence; it is not the be all and end all of Rabbi Rietti. Rietti has been engaged in youth education for 22 years, both as a teacher and an administration, and is known for espousing the Montessori method of training in Jewish education. He is a noted author and lecturer throughout the continental United States and his educational and inspirational material is both studied and experiences by many thousands of individuals each year.
    • This is not an example of content forking -- Rietti existed as a noted individual prior to joining Gateways and will remain a prominent individual even after a proverbial sudden demise of Gateways, should that occur. Gateways does not exist because of Rietti and he does not exist because of Gateways. It is merely his job -- he is not his job.
    • This is not an advertisement. The fact that a link included in that article is for a website entitled Jewish Inspiration is a far cry from linking to amazon.com. The fact is that Rietti is an author and a lecturer and this website, in addition to offering opporunities for purchase of his lectures, is a collection of information about Rabbi Rietti, as well as information as to how he in involved in Gateways. As more information is included in the article as it expands, citations will be included from sources other than from the back cover of his lecture albums.
    • Serious Rabbi? -- what is this supposed to mean? Is he ingenuine and secretly promoting a different religion or stirring up rebellion? Is he a court jester rabbi? This sort of personal attack cannot be tolerated!!
    • I especially contest your method of assertion, placing what appears to be two votes for merge and redirect, which may sway others to agree with a majority consisting of two of your votes. While this may have been unintentional, removal of one of your votes is critical. DRosenbach (Talk | Contribs) 13:25, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
      • There are no two votes by me, only one. The first is the nomination. I have not used different sigs and I never do. The second is my vote. This is not uncommon. He is an Orthodox kiruv rabbi, one of thousands like him, and at no time was it said that he is a court jester etc. Not every Aish HaTorah, Ohr Somayach and Chabad rabbi gets his own page on Wikipedia. Please assume good faith. IZAK (talk) 00:26, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
Your heading + vote is misleading. Why are the words merge and redirect bolded in your "heading," and why is redirect capitalized both times? It appears suspiciously similar to how votes appear on article for deletion voting pages -- namely, in bold. Should I embolden and capitalize the word Keep every time I use the word here? Why not simply make your point with persuasive text rather than sensationalistic headings that appear as a vote?
Did I make an article for every Gateways rabbi? No. Rabbis Suchard, Rietti and Becher are giants in their field. Rabbi Suchard founded Gateways, and Rabbi Noah Weinberg, the founder of Aish, has an article. Why don't you recommend merging that? Your logic is flawed, or at least ill presented. Rabbi Rietti is an accomplished author and lecturer divorced from his involvement in Gateways. He wrote The One Minute Masmid, and has about 195 lectures currently available on tape, CD and mp3 format. He is a commonly featured speaker at parlor meetings in the northeast United States and perhaps elsewhere as well. He has advanced training in education and was a teacher/administrator for 22 years. He provides private counseling -- and this is all separate and distinct from Gateways. Did Gateways propel him to further popularity -- probably if not definitely. Is it who he is? Absolutely not! Rabbi Slifkin has an article, even though he wrote a bunch of books and one of his books in particular, The Challenge of Creation, has its own article. He is similarly not his book and his book does not define him. What exactly is the issue other than the inadequately expressed and supported one above that poorly claims that Rabbis Rietti, and Suchard, for that matter, do not merit articles merely because they work for an organization that itself possesses an article? DRosenbach (Talk | Contribs) 02:50, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
DRosenbach: I appreciate your sincere concerns but you are veering off into too many tangents. Rabbis Suchard, Rietti and Becher may well deserve full blown articles at some stage, but at this time, all the information in the articles about them, indeed the few "citations" in those articles are just taken from Gateways brochures, so that if Gateways itself feels that it can combine them, and if it does not issue copious biographies of those rabbis, there is certainly no need for Wikipedia at this time to devote separate biographies for them. I am not advocating that the information be deleted and lost but that it be moved to the main Gateways article at this time, because Gateways without Rabbis Suchard, Rietti and Becher is not Gateways. Your comparisons to other noted rabbis do not add up either at this time either. Thanks, IZAK (talk) 07:00, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
Rather than argue on your rather subjective points, I will argue on the more objective ones in hopes of settling this argument. I notice a turn in your focus; it is no longer notability concerns but the merit of the articles to deserve existence based on length and bredth of coverage. WP:DEL clearly states that [a]rticles that are short and unlikely to be expanded could be merged into a larger article or list. This does not apply to any of the articles in question, as there is clearly more information that exists but has just not been added to the articles yet. Suchard's article is merely 3 days old, and even Rietti's, which is several weeks old, possesses the objective quality of "expandability" - rather than insert information without proper citation and precision, the information provided about his biography is forthcoming and will be added in time. There is no violation in creating a stub for a notable person, and as it is quite evident that the consensus has gathered around a confidence in notability, what sense is there to demand a merge when it is against both policy, and in the consensus opinion so far, common sense. DRosenbach (Talk | Contribs) 12:50, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
For the creator of the Gateways article it would have been wiser to put in all the comprehensive information into it first, about its founding director Rabbi Suchard and about its two leading full time employees Rabbis Rietti and Becher who work for Gateways and Rabbi Suchard. Then, as the information about them and their whole operation would have beeen expanded with more sources, separate biographies about the rabbis could be an outgrowth down the line. It makes no sense writing one article about a small institution and then creating individual articles about three of its four full time rabbis. Therefore, the current approach of writing up separate articles about the organization and three of its rabbis is redundant, even if the rabbis have a somewhat broader resume, they are presently strongly indentified with, and work exclusively for, Gateways, AFAIK. IZAK (talk) 22:28, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

*Merge per IZAK. Bhaktivinode (talk) 17:21, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

  • Keep. The rationale here is essentially delete and merge, which is contrary to §4(I) of the GFDL as edit histories of merged text must be preserved. Per WP:BEFORE, "Consider making the page a useful redirect or proposing it be merged rather than deleted. Neither of these actions requires an AfD." MrPrada (talk) 22:26, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete because -- while I'm sure he's a fine rabbi -- he's only starting to make a name for himself but he hasn't gotten there yet. Not enough coverage by useful media and nothing really notable yet for an encyclopedia. To the extent there's anything notable, it can be merged into suitable articles (e.g., as Izak suggests). Thanks. HG | Talk 08:36, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Merge per rationale given by HG. Admittedly this is a marginal case but this material would probably be more appropriate at the Gateways article. Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 13:21, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Merge and redirect Based on the content of his biography, Rabbi Rietti doesn't seem notable at this time. Perhaps at some future time he will be notable; he should have an encyclopedia article at that time. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 17:39, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete Non notable religious leader. Bhaktivinode (talk) 04:30, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Speedy close. The nominator has not requested deletion. The talk page is the place to discuss merging, not AfD. If consensus can't be reached there you can ask for outside opinion at WP:RFC. Phil Bridger (talk) 12:48, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Merge and Redirect to Gateways. Culturalrevival (talk) 14:13, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Merge and Redirect to the Gateways article. --Ave Caesar (talk) 19:22, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete - maybe warrants mention on Gateways page if he is one of their main speakers, but NN for separate article at this time. Looks promising, with God's help, may he be successful. --Shuki (talk) 22:38, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
Request a Mistrial

I would like to request a "mistrial" of sorts -- I was under the assumption that articles did not have to added to Wikipedia fully-formed, but that they could be added as stubs and expanded over time -- silly me, I thought that was the point of a wiki. The article has been greatly modified from the content and format that has been voted on by everyone above, and as such, perhaps a new vote is in order, should IZAK still feel that his point is sound. DRosenbach (Talk | Contribs) 05:47, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

  • Hi DRosenbach: What "mistrial"? Noone and nothing is "on trial" here! Firstly, the "improvements" to the article are all from Orthodox Jewish outreach sources that all strive to advertise and promote the work of organisations like Gateways and its rabbis, and Gateways and its rabbis have access to and influence over many of these sources. Secondly, any article can start and exist as a Wikipedia:Stub and be given time to grow. I have often advocated for such positions when subjects are clearly notable in their own right by any and all known Wikipedia standards. However, the present situation is not like that, because even if the article/biography about Rabbi Rietti grew, the reality of the past ten years remains that since he has been a long time employee of Gateways and he continues to serve as one of its chief lecturers at their seminars etc, the article about him should be part of the Gateways article, giving the information about his earlier background in that context would be important as it would explain why he is important to Gateways and its mission, and as that grows there may be a valid reason to create a separate article for him later on. To repeat, it makes no sense to create an article about a relatively small Orthodox outreach organization and at the same time to try create articles about three of its of four or five full time rabbis in violation of Wikipedia:Content forking, primarily defined as: "A content fork is usually an unintentional creation of several separate articles all treating the same subject" and in this case it is intentional. IZAK (talk) 06:13, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
relatively small Orthodox outreach organization
What does relatively mean? I'd say Gateways is very large and rapidly becoming one of the most popular Jewish outreach organizations. They rent out hotels for Jewish holidays and thousands of people visit these hotels each year to spend their holiday with and hear lectures from the Gateways speakers. Then there are the other 6 divisions of Gateways -- hardly a small operation. So it does make a lot of sense to make an article about it and any of their speakers who are extremely notable.
Compared to Chabad, Aish HaTorah and NCSY it is tiny. Just look at its full time staff and see why it's very small. Rabbi Buchwald's NJOP is much bigger and they don't request articles for every last rabbi who teaches for them and there are hundreds of them. Not to mention non-Orthodox rabbis who do not get biographies even though they may lead congregations that numbers in the hundreds and even the thousands yet their biographical information gets mentioned in the context of being the rabbi/s of their synagogues and not as you wish to do here by having separate articles for the Gateways article and also for four of its five or so full time rabbis, which is over-reaching by any standard. IZAK (talk) 07:16, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
unintentional creation of several separate articles all treating the same subject
That's just it. Gateways is but a part of Rabbi Rietti's life. He is has recorded 195 lectures and people through America buy them and listen to them. He has yet to go platinum, but 195 albums is 195 more than I have recorded, and probably 195 more than most people have recorded. He is also an author of at least 2 texts. He has also been featured on a radio show numerous times. Your assertion is incorrect - his article and the Gateways article do not treat the same subject. DRosenbach (Talk | Contribs) 06:48, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
Many rabbis record their lectures and they sell them, he is no exception. He goes on some radio shows and many of them are sponsored. It does not make him into a great and notable sage. He is basically a salesman for Orthodox and Haredi Judaism trying to convince people to become religious and his texts are similarly geared. All this fits beautifully with the Gateways mission, but at this time it is hard to see why he should get a full blown biography. IZAK (talk) 07:16, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
God is in management and rabbis are in marketing; God decided what the Torah is all rabbis market the Torah - that is their job. Salesmen who are notable because they are considered the top salesmen in America are still notable, whether or not you want to buy their product, and "great sagehood" is not yet a criterion for notability on Wikipedia. The disdain exuded by your comments is clouding your objectivity. Are you suggesting that the Beatles article be deleted (or deleted, redirected and moved) because they are famous for doing something that makes them money? And we can't possibly have every band get an article, so no bands can have an article? That seems to be your basis premise, or at least it is now, because your premise continually shifts as the target of your attack becomes sufficiently protected with logic, reason, citation, source and objective fact. DRosenbach (Talk | Contribs) 07:29, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
Speaking for God by anyone will not help this discussion. This should not get into a theological debate because it is not what this (or any) AfD is about. Noone is debating the roles or powers of God here. But there are certainly different classes of rabbis. Some are great scholars of the law, and others are..., well, preachers, but while many scholars earn their articles by dint of their vast erudition and scholarship that is known to other scholars, the preachers and "salesmen", while they may be well-liked by many people, cannot be classed in the category of notability as great scholars and rabbis, such as rosh yeshivas and Chasidic Rebbes for example. Even in the Baal teshuva world their are standards for greatness and notability, and while not every Chabad, Aish HaTorah and Ohr Somayach rabbis get their own biographies, only the very exceptional ones merit them after careful scrutiny by editors like us. That is why there was once even a project of Wikipedia:Orthodox Rabbinical Biography Collaboration of the Week where such matters we are discussing could be debated, but has been dormant, and the result is that each new biography must be debated on a case by case basis, which is what we are doing here and you need to WP:AGF about that. IZAK (talk) 07:51, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mordechai Suchard

Mordechai Suchard (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

Not notable, simply states creation of an organisation, but makes no assertion to that organisations notability, and seems to exist either only as a plug for the person, organisation, or both Ged UK (talk) 20:28, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

  • Strong Keep - Rabbi Suchard is very notable as the founder of the Gateways organization. More extensive information regarding his biography as well as regarding the organization has been solicited and is currently pending delivery. DRosenbach (Talk | Contribs) 20:32, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Weak Keep I added references and cleaned up the article a bit, but it really needs more help. Bstone (talk) 20:51, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep per additional sourcing added by Bstone, which further shows the notability of this particular rabbi. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 21:35, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 00:12, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep there's more here including New York Jewish Week that discusses his work with Gateways. Could there also be more sourcing available in Hebrew? Possibly someone can search there? TravellingCarithe Busy Bee 00:28, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
    • The source/s you cite are only three "ads in print" for the Gateways programs. They are probably getting that press because they paid for pull page or significant ads in other parts of the papers, a not uncommon "professional courtesy" that Jewish newspapers extend to generous advertisers, and Gateways is known for its lavish spending on full-blown advertising in print, the mail, and on the Internet. IZAK (talk) 08:58, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Merge/Redirect into Gateways. His meeting of the WP:BIO standard is questionable. Gateways, a small article, would be greatly enhanced by background information of its founder. In addition, it looks like his main claim to notability is his founding and leadership of Gateways. Combining the above reasons, makes merge the most reasonable solution. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 00:31, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Gateways will be expanded -- it is two days old! Give it some time to expand and increasing its length by combining articles that each have their own merit to exist because of article length will be a moot issue. DRosenbach (Talk | Contribs) 13:31, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Merge and Redirect to the Gateways article because he is its founder and it's his "claim to fame" so that this article not be a violation of Wikipedia:Content forking. Also fails Wikipedia:Notability (people) as a serious rabbi. Outside of founding and running Gateways, he has done nothing notable and has not been noted as such in the media. NOTE: The Rabbi Jonathan Rietti article should also be merged into the Gateways article for the same reasons since he is Gateway's leading lecturer. IZAK (talk) 07:33, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Also fails as a serious rabbi -- are you joking? What is a serious rabbi? Is he a clown-type of rabbi? Your comments are inflammatory -- surely a violation of WP:NPOV as they at best lack fairness of tone and at most incite derision. Please keep your comments civil.
He is the executive director and driving force behind an organization that affects thousands of individuals a year through its programs and lectures series. He is the subject of a number of articles, including at least one in The New York Times. Information will be added to the article as it expands and citations will similarly accrue. DRosenbach (Talk | Contribs) 13:31, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Comment In addition to being the founding rabbi and spiritual director of Gateways, he also serves on the responsa board of Ask The Rabbi. I think he passed the "serious rabbi" test pretty easily. Bstone (talk) 14:42, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
All that Also fails as a serious rabbi means is that he is simply not a notable rabbi beyond organizing and running Gateways. He is not known for his scholarship and there is essentially nothing in the media or articles that claim he is anything more than an organizational/admistrative or "executive director" rabbi. Similarly not all Aish HaTorah or Ohr Somayach or Chabad rabbis get listed with articles as they too are just functionaries and are not serious rabbis and this does not mean they are clowns. Kindly assume good faith. Thank you. IZAK (talk) 00:22, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
Perhaps you should review the meaning of words prior to using them -- words are, for the most part, objective. As brought from a dictionary, serious can refer to being deeply interested or involved, which I contend Rabbi Suchard is for taking the time, energy and effort to start Gateways. In fact, he even meets the criteria of being of such character or quality as to appeal to the expert, the connoisseur, or the sophisticate, as indicated by Gateways particular appeal to collegiates, young professionals and discerning Jews of all levels, giving them particularly focused direction on such things as Judaism's authenticity and the existence of the Oral Torah. If you had simply meant of considerable size or scope; substantial, I was actually giving you the benefit of the doubt in assuming both good faith and that you are discerning enough to use a word that both conveys your intent as well as avoids ambiguity. I would hardly agree that serious denotes substantiality over frivolousness. DRosenbach (Talk | Contribs) 02:36, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
DRosenbach: At this time Rabbis Suchard, Rietti and Becher are the creators and managers of Gateways and without them Gateways cannot exist at this time. Even the information "cited" in the article/s is mostly from Gateways brochures. Wikipedia need not host seperate articles about them, when all the information can be combined into the Gateways article itself. I am not advocating the loss of this information, but that it be moved to the main Gateways article where it belongs. Perhaps sometime in the future, when many more articles and sources emerge, they will merit their own biographies but for now Rabbis Suchard, Rietti and Becher and Gateways are one and the same. IZAK (talk) 07:07, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
IZAK: At this time, Rabbis Rietti and Becher are independant entities. Gateways exists because of them, not [[]vice vera]]. They are each accomplished authors and lecturers, notable in their field of fighting American Jewish assimilation and developing and presenting course material for lecture series focused on establishing the authenticity of classical Jewish thought, philosophy, vision and ritual practice. Your assertion that this information belongs in the Gateways article is inaccurate. These articles are clearly expandable -- they do not currently project the full expanse of information relating to their subjects, and policy delineated both here and here dictates that they be allowed to maintain themselves for further expansion.
As for Rabbi Suchard, he is the foudner of Gateways. He is notable as previously substantiated, and currently supersubstantiated by the sudden switch of focus of your siege to issues relating to bredth of coverage. Once again, as dictated by policy (both here and here), it complies with proper form to allow a 3-day old article to expand. DRosenbach (Talk | Contribs) 13:03, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
If, as according to you, Gateways is nothing without its rabbis then perhaps its article should be nominated for deletion instead. You cannot have it both ways. If the rabbis are what makes Gateways what it is then that is where they belong as they have devoted the last decade of their fairly young lives to it and it is the culmination of their careers at this time. They are happy and successful at Gateways and it does not look like they are leaving it any time soon. For the creator of the Gateways article it would have been wiser to put in all the comprehensive information into it, about its founding director Rabbi Suchard and about its two leading full time employees Rabbis Rietti and Becher who work for Gateways and Rabbi Suchard. Then, as the information about them and their whole operation would have beeen expanded with more sources, separate biographies about the rabbis could be an outgrowth down the line. It makes no sense writing one article about a small institution and then creating individual articles about three of its four full time rabbis. Therefore, the current approach of writing up separate articles about the organization and three of its rabbis is redundant, even if the rabbis have a somewhat broader resume, they are presently strongly indentified with, and work exclusively for, Gateways, AFAIK. IZAK (talk) 22:23, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

*Merge per IZAK. Bhaktivinode (talk) 17:23, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

  • Delete because -- while I'm sure he's a fine rabbi -- he's still only starting to make a name for himself but he hasn't gotten there yet. Not enough coverage by useful media and nothing really notable yet for an encyclopedia. To the extent there's anything notable, it can be merged into suitable articles (e.g., as Izak suggests). Thanks. HG | Talk 08:33, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Merge per above Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 13:22, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Weak delete Most of Rabbi Suchard's "accomplishments" aren't notable (handing out an award, contributing to a politician), but being selected to accompany President Bush makes him seem somewhat notable. Despite mention of a New York Times article, I searched (using both the Times search and Google) and couldn't find anything. It's a close call, but I lean toward deleting the article until Rabbi Suchard's notability is more clearly established. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 17:44, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete per Malik Shabazz. Bhaktivinode (talk) 04:31, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Merge and Redirect to Gateways per Brewcrewer. Culturalrevival (talk) 14:15, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete - maybe warrants mention on Gateways page, but NN for separate article. --Shuki (talk) 22:41, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
  • NOTE: See related Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mordechai Becher. Thank you, IZAK (talk) 06:52, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Miscellany for deletion

[edit] Proposed deletion ({{prod}})

[edit] Redirects for deletion

[edit] Deletion review

[edit] Proposals

[edit] Templates

[edit] Categories

[edit] CfD nomination of Category:Crime in the West Bank and Gaza Strip

Category:Crime in the West Bank and Gaza Strip has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. -- Avi (talk) 18:34, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Templates

[edit] Images