Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Day of Atonement, Christian

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 on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Keep 11 Keep, 7 Merge Jtkiefer ^{T | @ | C} ----- 03:05, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Day of Atonement, Christian and Feast of Tabernacles, Christian

These two articles are forks of Jewish holidays to allow for the fact that members of the Church of God observe these as well. They lack individual merits, and I'd recommend a merge on this one. JFW | T@lk 03:44, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

• Merge both as per Jfdwolff. -- Kjkolb 04:14, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
• Merge both. --Briangotts (talk) 04:34, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete if possible, otherwise Merge. What fiction will they think of next? IZAK 04:57, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. If we have separate entries for the various Jewish and Christian holidays, why not entries for this particular denomination? I suppose it could be merged if it can be done so intelligently. Sensor (talk • contribs)
• Merge for reasons stated by JFW. Joaquin Murietta 05:59, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
• Merge but carefully - retaining the Jewish flavour of the Articles Fintor 06:59, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
• Comment if even the nominator thought the two should be merged, why on earth waste time putting them through Articles for Deletion? Be bold, and just carry out the merge. Proto t c 08:34, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
  • I'd like to get some consensus before making such a move. Call it a flame retardant. I also thought there could be some delete votes. JFW | T@lk 09:14, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
• Keep as they are. We should not discriminate against this church or its holidays. Other holidays have their own articles. There is no reason to delete or merge them. 10:06, 14 October 2005 (UTC) (preceding unsigned comment by Logophile (talk • contribs) )
• Keep - No valid reason to delete or merge. --Irishpunktom\^talk 13:48, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
• Merge as per Jfdwolff. They could also be merged with Church of God. The titles themselves are POV - they should have been Day of Atonement (Church of God) etc. Jayjg ^(talk) 14:51, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Exactly, how are they POV? --Irishpunktom\^talk 14:56, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
    • I think Jayjg is referring to the fact that these holidays are not actually recognized by the vast majority of Christians, so the titles are misleading. These appear to be primarily celebrated by the Church of God and possibly a few other small evangelical sects.--Isotope23 17:12, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

• Comment, by the one who originated the articles. The reason that the term Christian was added to both titles is that the articles could not be entered without a unique identifier. The term Day of Atonement takes one to a disambiguation page which lists Yom Kippur and Day of Atonement, Islam. The term Feast of Tabernacles is redirected to Sukkot. I was simply trying to enter a unique article with new information, no POV was intended by title choice. COGwriter 13:55, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

• Keep as the two articles contain substantial information not included in the Yom Kippur and Sukkot articles, the latter article doesn't mention Christian observation of the holiday at all. The two articles can definitely stand alone, and are separate topics from the Jewish holidays, so should not be merged.--Kewp (t) 14:59, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Actual information. Trollderella 16:15, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. As many have stated above, there is a substantial portion of this religious group's celebration that is distinct from the traditional Jewish celebrations on the same day.--eleuthero 16:22, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
• Merge Day of Atonement, Christian into Church of God... barring this (and one could make a case for not doing this because there are other small Christian sects that apparently recognize this day), I will do a rewrite the article if the consensus is Keep to make it clear that the day of atonement is not generally recognized by Protestant and Catholic versions of Christianity as a holy day. Current version is misleading because most Christians do not recognize or celebrate this day.--Isotope23 17:05, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

edit above to clarify...Feast of Tabernacles, Christian is a clear keep as it is clearly stated in the article that most Christians don't celebrate it. Though I would advocate a Move to Feast of Tabernacles (Church of God) unless someone knows of other significant sects of Christianity that celebrate this day--Isotope23 17:10, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

• keep. Interesting, notable, why delete? Roodog2k (Hello there!) 23:23, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
• Keep but move to Day of Atonement (Church of God), per Jayjg's wise counsel.  BD2412 ^talk 01:12, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
• Keep of course. Now I did submit this article, and would like to state that because some Church of God groups do not keep this, that it should not be merged into the Church of God page. I thought that part of the purpose of Wikipedia was to have information on many topics. The Christian COG view of this time is different than that of the Jews. The article points this out. It is better not merged with the Jewish Sukkot as that article is entirely about the Jewish view, while my article explains how a minority group of Christians view it. FWIW, years ago the Feast of Tabernacles was the largest annual worldwide convention of its type in the world. I will be leaving to observe the Feast of Tabernacles myself early Sunday morning and would be happy to address any specifics. Thank you for your consideration. COGwriter 03:06, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

* I already said Keep, but wish to add an important point. The monthly/bimonthly magazines of the three largest COGs (UCG's Good News, PCG's Philadelphia Trumpet, and LCG's Tomorow's World) go to over 1,000,000 subscribers each issue. Between them, these three groups are on over 300 television stations in the US, plus have radio and international impact (there are also many other similar groups on tv and radio, etc. that observe these days). There are people who would like to know more about the days that these and other groups observe. And the impact of these groups is not so obscure as to be irrelevant. But I do not object to the titles like Day of Atonement (Church of God) with the comment in it that some non-Church of God groups keep it. COGwriter 03:48, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

• Keep as the articles are distinct and informative. There is no reason to delete or merge them, as suppression of valid information is against the intent of Wikipedia. Mjas 03:18, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

• Keep for the following reasons:

1. The articles in question are about holidays that have a distinctly Christian interpretation of each Jewish holiday. If you read each article carefully, it is clear that these are not simply "Jewish holidays" to those Christians that keep them. Rather, they are holidays which have a meaning that is wholly different from how most Jews would understand them. (How many Jews would equate the sacrificial offerings with Jesus or the Feast of Tabernacles with the second coming of Christ?)
2. If we are to merge all religious holidays that have different (or overlapping) interpretations, then the Pentecost article should be merged with Shavuot – two holidays that have the same origin, but totally different interpretations depending on whether you’re Christian or Jewish. The same would be true for Passover. To merge Jewish and Christian holidays onto the same article would ultimately fail to adequately describe either religion's perspective of those holidays.
3. A number of Christian groups have origins separate from the Church of God that also celebrate these holidays. For example, consider the Assemblies of Yahweh and Jews for Jesus, and other forms of Messianic Judaism.
4. In addition, some mainstream Christians choose to observe such holidays as the Feast of Tabernacles – even if they do not consider it Biblically required for Christians today. For evidence, see related articles on the ICEF and Christian Broadcasting Network websites.

For all of the above reasons, I believe both articles should be kept separate and distinct. Stephenw77 04:45, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

• Merge as per JFW. --Eliezer | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 23:07, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. You can't "bagsie" the holidays, man, and it would be wrong to redirect a Christian holiday to a Jewish one that does not give proper account of the Christian observance. Move to Jay's recommendation if it's true that only the one church celebrates them. Grace Note 05:05, 21 October 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.