Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anti-Gentilism

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. - Mailer Diablo 16:32, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Anti-Gentilism

Anti-Gentilism (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Neologism. Google shows only neo-Nazi and white supremacy websites. ←Humus sapiens ну? 07:46, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete. Nn Neologism, and Wikipedia!=Wiktionary. yandman 08:35, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per yandman. Beit Or 10:36, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per yandman. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 13:09, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Wikipedia is not a place for neologisms: as per Wikipedia:Neologisms. --SunStar Nettalk 13:12, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete - the "concept" - really a vicious libel - is covered extensively in articles related to antisemitism. --Leifern 13:19, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete - nn neologism. MER-C 14:01, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per WP:NEO. TSO1D 14:44, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete - per WP:NEO and Wikipedia is not a dictionary Jayden54 15:12, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Don't Delete - I think most of the comments above miss the point: there is a fairly broad spectrum of accusations that Judaism discriminates against non-Jews. Most of these accusations come from antisemitic sources, but there are also less rabid sources, such as Israel Shahak and other commentators. The accusation exists, and if nothing else, it has become a central theme of antisemitism. I see it as something like the blood libel, which has its own entry. Obviously, the term "blood libel" carries its own judgment about the accuracy of the accusation, and I think this article ought to make more clear that the term is an accusation rather than a phenomenon that everyone recognizes. But the fact is that there is a pretty big body of claims of anti-Gentilism and responses to these claims, and I think it is appropriate for an encyclopedia to recognize this fact. "Anti-Gentilism" seems a reasonable name to give to an article on this exchange, although if someone could point me to another article that addresses the matter (I think "blood libel" is too specific), I could see merit in deleting this one. -- DLH —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.82.9.92 (talk) 15:49, 3 January 2007 (UTC).
Israel and Anti-Gentile Traditions shows a reasonable use of the term by a non-antisemite, and Israel Shahak uses "Anti-Gentile" extensively in Jewish History, Jewish Religion : The Weight of Three Thousand Years -- DLH —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.82.9.92 (talk) 16:14, 3 January 2007 (UTC).
Also "Charedi Rabbis Rush To Disavow Anti-Gentile Book" -- DLH —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.82.9.49 (talk) 19:55, 3 January 2007 (UTC).
Exceptional claims require exception sourcing. A couple of usages doesn't make this into a notable neologism, and the topic itself is (at best) a vague charge of xenophobia which isn't encyclopedic or notable, or (at worst) a soapbox for advancing a false generalization. Wherease anti-semitism is a widespread term that can apply to anyone with prejudices toward Jews, this is merely a concocted and antagonistic term designed to position all Jews as prejudiced. Tarinth 18:59, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment At the same time, livius, [1] about the leper myth, and ancient Hellenic Judeaphobia can be legitimately entered into the antisemitism as a subarticle. For example, Livius talks about Jews being thrown out of Egypt for being lepers (an insulting reversal of the Exodus story), and worshipping pigs, hating other nations, being lescivious, making converts renounce their parents, holding adherence to Judaism as disloyal to the host country. These are ancient precursors to modern antisemitism and should be noted. Guy Montag 19:24, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete As pov fork. Guy Montag 19:25, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. SlimVirgin (talk) 20:58, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Yossiea 21:15, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. Per nom, Tarinth. Jayjg (talk) 23:00, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per SunStar and Tarinth. 6SJ7 05:22, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete POV fork. Not much substance in this article in any case. --Folantin 08:09, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete I was once stopped in the street by an old man who asked the way to Leicester Square. I politely directed him in the right direction, his response: "Thanks for telling a goy the direction". I was startled and continued on my way. I latter thought a good response to his foolish remark would be "Whoops, I thought you had a Jewish nose". For some reason they seem to think Jews intrinsically hate gentiles. No doubt we have good reason to as our history in their hands has shown, but to claim it is "on the part of Judaism or the Jewish People” as a whole is absurd. Chesdovi 14:26, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
Ouch! "For some reason they seem to think Jews intrinsically hate gentiles?" Who is "they" in your sentence? -- DLH 66.82.9.92 06:07, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Scrimshaw7 and others with his mistaken views, like the man in my story. Chesdovi 14:21, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete this one-sentence invitation to trouble that clearly goes against Wikipedia:Avoid neologisms. What exactly did User:Scrimshaw7 have in mind when he made [2] his one and only entry? IZAK 21:43, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Isarig 22:01, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. --GHcool 07:21, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment This is pretty clearly going down. I have the impression that most people read the "-ism" suffix as connoting a more cohesive social phenomenon than I do, which is fine: the meaning of a word is whatever most people think it is, and, no, I would not say that the term "Anti-Gentilism" with the connotation of meetings to plot how to screw the goys, etc., needs an encyclopedia entry. But I still think the exchange of accusations of discrimination against non-Jews and responses to the accusations is something that merits notice, possibly as a subtopic in the antisemitism article, as I think someone suggested above. Thoughts? -- DLH 66.82.9.92 06:07, 7 January 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.