Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kehilat Orach Eliezer
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
You have new messages (last change).
- 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 keep. W.marsh 17:47, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Kehilat Orach Eliezer
Nonnotable synagogue in Manhattan (New York City). I live not far from there, and it's not even the third most notable synagogue on the Upper West Side, after we account for Congregation Ohab Zedek, The Jewish Center, and Congregation Shearith Israel. It's like a shack among mansions. Who cares? Out it goes. YechielMan 20:58, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletions. IZAK 08:08, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- Delete it's WP:NN as it's just basically a minyan (if that) that has been thrown together. There are tens of thousands like these and they are not notable, beyond the fact that the phenomenon exists, and they do not deserve articles about each one. Perhaps it has the seeds for an article about How synagogues are established and grow or thereabouts someday... IZAK 08:08, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- Keep. Congregation has received extensive media coverage for its innovative and controversial approaches. Examples include: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6],[7]. WP:N and WP:V are easily satisfied here. --Shirahadasha 08:43, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- Shira, the media reports on many crazy things "extensivley" each day and then those reports get stored in cyberspace on the Internet and you can dig them up on Google at any time, but that does not make those items interesting or noteworthy (unless of course you have an agenda, then any crumb of "news" is worthy of being "noted") and in this case what you have is a barely functional congregation that, beyond a few headlines it has grabbed, is a totally unimportant place. There are tens of thousands of shtiebelach in the world, some with very important rabbis and members, and essentially NONE of them get an article on Wikipedia, nor should they, until such time as something REALLY significant can be connected to them beyond making a few local headlines that are carried by the Jewish news services. IZAK 10:00, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- Comment IZAK, you appear to be making an argument that you disagree with what it is doing, which is of course your right, But I don't believe this means it isn't notable as Wikipedia policy defines that term. See WP:IDONTLIKEIT. --Shirahadasha 18:36, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- Nope Shira! I am using that object in my skull called the brain applying simple logic and reason based on facts. Oh, and I am not five years old, so I can stomach many things that I don't like! You know, the opposite can be said too you too, that it is not enough that you like this article/topic to "keep" it (and by now we know what you like just as we get to know about all editors based simply on their edit history and the type of articles they create and the POVs they consistently defend and uphold if they do it often enough. One does not have to be Sherlock Holmes to figure these kind of things out.) Kindly do not put words into my mouth. Thanks, IZAK 18:56, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- Comment IZAK, you appear to be making an argument that you disagree with what it is doing, which is of course your right, But I don't believe this means it isn't notable as Wikipedia policy defines that term. See WP:IDONTLIKEIT. --Shirahadasha 18:36, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- Shira, the media reports on many crazy things "extensivley" each day and then those reports get stored in cyberspace on the Internet and you can dig them up on Google at any time, but that does not make those items interesting or noteworthy (unless of course you have an agenda, then any crumb of "news" is worthy of being "noted") and in this case what you have is a barely functional congregation that, beyond a few headlines it has grabbed, is a totally unimportant place. There are tens of thousands of shtiebelach in the world, some with very important rabbis and members, and essentially NONE of them get an article on Wikipedia, nor should they, until such time as something REALLY significant can be connected to them beyond making a few local headlines that are carried by the Jewish news services. IZAK 10:00, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- [Weak Keep]We need to draft some real guidelines for synagouges. In the past, we have left in unknown Conservative or Reform synagouges created by the rabbi of the congregation, that have never made the newspaper or done anything ntable. Here we have a congregation that is in the newspapers regularly. If this gets deleted, then all the little congregations have to go, and all the unknown kiruv rabbis and community kollels should be deleted. --Jayrav 14:01, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- Keep. The sources cited by Shirahadasha satisfy me that the notability guidelines are met. It doesn't have to be really significant or famous, just notable.--Kubigula (talk) 23:07, 20 February 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.
