Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elisheva Carlebach
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 Keep, given the improvements made to the articleduring the course of the discussion. Xoloz 17:25, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Elisheva Carlebach
NN, fails WP:PROF and non-notable relations of possible notables don't need their own article. Yeshivish 16:42, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletions. —Yeshivish 16:49, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
- Delete per above. --Yeshivish 16:49, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Oy Vey! Non-notable. Her book didn't seem to leave much of a mark, and there's nothing else there. Notability is not inherited. MarkBul 18:19, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
- Delete -- but it's close. She is a scholar of ordinary attainments & with notable family ties. I almost voted to Keep. -- Rob C. alias Alarob 22:38, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Notability not established. --Crusio 17:44, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
- keep I dont see much in the way of substantial arguments for deletion here. Though Queens College is not a research university, the CUNY Graduate center is a high-ranking research university, and she;'s a full professor there. the article was a uncharacteristically modest one, mentioning her family but scanting her own accomplishments. She has actually published two major books, one of which was a finalist for a major reward as is documented by several very strong reviews in major academic periodicals, and a number of research articles. I added this to the article. That's enough for notability as an author or an academic. DGG (talk) 07:32, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
- Delete per nom.--Miamite 08:32, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
- Delete WP:VERIFY, WP:BIO--AmerHisBuff 09:18, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
- keep per dgg--יודל 11:53, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
* Delete Not notable (and I'm a QC alum) Avi 13:30, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
-
- Keep Article substantially improved -- Avi 20:32, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
- Keep, per DGG's substantial improvement to the article and argument for notability. --MPerel 17:00, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
- Keep per DGG. Full professor, lots of books and articles, lots of mentions elsewhere. She clearly passes basic WP:N and WP:V requirements. Although perhaps her ancestry and Jewish affiliations in her personal life are currently getting too much mention compared to her academic work, this is a perfectly notable academic and I see no problem under WP:PROF. Does a professor have to win a Nobel Prize to be considered as notable as a Simpsons episode or a minor Star Trek character? --Shirahadasha 17:02, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
-
- Comment Much as I hate to say it: a Simpsons episode or Star Trek have been seen by millions of people. That makes them notable. For an academic to be notable, more is needed than being a full professor who has published cited works. I see no reason to modify my "delete" vote --Crusio 21:32, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
- Delete per Yeshivish--Truest blue 17:47, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletions. —Eliyak T·C 04:03, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
- Keep as notability is not in doubt, and indeed is heightened by the fact that she is married to a Haredi rosh yeshiva and is one of very few Jewish Orthodox women (herself descended from a rabbinic dynasty yet) to reach such a high academic standing, attaining not just a PhD but also becoming a long-standing professor and author of serious works of Judaic scholarship. In the Haredi world, women cannot become Talmudic scholars, so that this person's milestones are very significant in that context as well. It's a kind of "Rosa Parks" of Haredi women story in a way, but with lots more academics involved. Her books and research deal with some of the most complex, controversial and difficult areas of Judaism, Jewish history and Jewish studies. Just as a professor who studied and is an authority in astrophysics may not be regarded as "notable" by the outside world, they do nevertheless have notabilty in their own field of expertise and are recognized as such by their colleagues. Dr. Elisheva Cralebach is known and notable in the field of Jewish studies in New York City and where-ever Judaism is studied in an academic non-yeshivish manner. IZAK 04:30, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
- Comment. Although after the additions of DGG the article might pass WP:PROF, your comments are way over the top. 1) Plenty of Orthodox woman of similar religious level as Yoffen have PhD's. 2) She never became a talmudic scholar. 3) Her books do not deal with the "most complex, controversial and difficult areas of Judaism.--Yeshivish 18:03, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
- Yeshivish: It is your POV that my comments are 'way over the top" (top of what? one may ask.) In reply to your points: 1) Wrong. Very few Haredi women have PhDs and even less are tenured professors who have published voluminous books and published widely. 2) I never said that she became a Talmudic scholar. That is just you twisting my words around, which remains to be seen why you did that. What I did state is that: "In the Haredi world, women cannot become Talmudic scholars, so that this person's milestones are very significant in that context as well" meaning it is precisely because they cannot and do not become Talmudic scholars, then the fact that they become great in other fields like academics to which they are not restricted, is all the more notable. 3) Her books certainly do deal with some of the most complex issues in the Jewish world, such as "The Pursuit of Heresy: Rabbi Moses Hagiz and the Sabbatian Controversies" that deals with the question of Sabbatai Zevi the false Messiah that touches upon questiopns of the Jewish Messiah and the questions surrounding Jewish Messiah claimants; and in "Divided Souls: Converts from Judaism in Germany" she deals with issues that touch upon Jews in apostasy, Conversion to Judaism, History of the Jews in Germany and much more in Jewish history all of which contribute to the filed of academic Jewish studies. You can't get more serious than that. IZAK 03:26, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
- See here: Going over the top "The phrase 'over the top' , has come to refer to excess, particularly outrageous behaviour or hyperbole. A person engaging in such activity would be figuratively 'going over the top.'" 1) Very few Haredi women have PhDs (according to most defenitions of Haredi). However, you said that "few Jewish Orthodox women ... attaining not just a PhD... (emphais added). 2)Your current explanation doesn't really make sense. Is it more notable that one made (great) achievements in a field when that person had other fields to go into or when the person had no other fields to go into? Obviously, the former. 3) The questions surrounding the Jewish Messiah are never described as "complex." They are usually described as "very vague" or something similar to that effect. In any case, currently, it is not a "controversial" issue. She is not at any sort of risk of being publicy denounced.--Yeshivish 04:05, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
- Yeshivish: It is your POV that my comments are 'way over the top" (top of what? one may ask.) In reply to your points: 1) Wrong. Very few Haredi women have PhDs and even less are tenured professors who have published voluminous books and published widely. 2) I never said that she became a Talmudic scholar. That is just you twisting my words around, which remains to be seen why you did that. What I did state is that: "In the Haredi world, women cannot become Talmudic scholars, so that this person's milestones are very significant in that context as well" meaning it is precisely because they cannot and do not become Talmudic scholars, then the fact that they become great in other fields like academics to which they are not restricted, is all the more notable. 3) Her books certainly do deal with some of the most complex issues in the Jewish world, such as "The Pursuit of Heresy: Rabbi Moses Hagiz and the Sabbatian Controversies" that deals with the question of Sabbatai Zevi the false Messiah that touches upon questiopns of the Jewish Messiah and the questions surrounding Jewish Messiah claimants; and in "Divided Souls: Converts from Judaism in Germany" she deals with issues that touch upon Jews in apostasy, Conversion to Judaism, History of the Jews in Germany and much more in Jewish history all of which contribute to the filed of academic Jewish studies. You can't get more serious than that. IZAK 03:26, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
- Comment. Although after the additions of DGG the article might pass WP:PROF, your comments are way over the top. 1) Plenty of Orthodox woman of similar religious level as Yoffen have PhD's. 2) She never became a talmudic scholar. 3) Her books do not deal with the "most complex, controversial and difficult areas of Judaism.--Yeshivish 18:03, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
- Keep as per Izak. Yossiea (talk) 20:18, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
- Keep per DGG. -- Y not? 04:22, 11 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.
