Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jewish supremacy

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further 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 speedy delete.

[edit] Jewish supremacy

This was a recreation of an article that was already removed per VfD. If someone wants it restored, the correct route is Wikipedia:Votes for undeletion.

Anti-semitic garbage. Uppland 08:01, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

Comment: Actually, it's Semitic garbage. Jewish supremacism believes that Jews are superior, not inferior. (Unless you believe the page is to discredit the Jewish race) ral315 08:08, July 31, 2005 (UTC)

• Strong keep. Just because it's a vile, disgusting belief doesn't mean it doesn't deserve its own article. On the opposite side, Anti-Semitism also gets its own page, even though it's just as disgusting. Besides, the article seems to be (somewhat) NPOV. ral315 08:07, July 31, 2005 (UTC)
  • Do my edits achieve NPOV, in your view? CanadianCaesar 08:31, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
    • I don't think just one user can change an article to be completely NPOV; multiple views influence the article and help keep its NPOV perspective. But you did a great job on getting rid of a lot of the POV stuff I was worried about. ral315 09:14, July 31, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep per Ral315, but I must say it's bloody unfortunate both ideologies even exist. CanadianCaesar 08:24, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, even though I agree that it's garbage. Nandesuka 12:33, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete The Kahanists/Kach can be described as Jewish Supremacists (the first ones) and do deserve a wiki page imho, but the idea that Jewish Supremacy exists as an ideology forming an unbroken link since biblical times is a deeply troubling POV. This article seems to have been written by people trying to make the points that

1.) A belief in Jewish supremacy is widely held by Jews

2.) Persecution of Jews is essentially linked to, if not caused by, aforesaid belief.

Both of these are POV (not to mention offensive to Jews and completely untrue in my experience). Evidence for chip on shoulder are:

a)Treating the bible as just a story when talking about God choosing Abraham, but as a historical document when talking about massacres by ancient Israelite soldiers.

b)In the sentence "Most modern anti-semitism.." POV inexplicably ignoring anti-semitism arising both from widespread misinterpretations of the gospels (e. g. belief that modern Jews continue to bear responsibility for Jesus'death) and simple xenophobia from differences in culture and lifestyle.

c)Suggesting Hitler's Jewish conspiracy theory has something to do with even an alleged belief by Jews that they are superior.. but trying to control the world through banking, or enslavement of other races, is not evidence that one believes oneself to be superior.

d)"..was the consequence" deliberately ambiguous about whether the holocaust was the consequence of Hitler's/Ford's beliefs (which are not implied to be mistaken) or of actual widespread supremacist thinking among Jews (which is absurd POV).

e)"Not until after.." the Kahanists were not around at Israel's creation and there is no evidence of Jewish supremacist movements at this time.. looks to me like an mischievous attempt to link Jewish supremacism with Zionism.

f)"As Israel grew militarily strong .. " POV controversial and partial statement.

g)" .. many Jews believed that .." absurd POV, more like a few nutcases.

h) Jonathan Sacks (chief rabbi of UK I think) quote: deliberate misinterpretation. "jewish future" means future of Jews not a future world in which everyone is Jewish and this is completely obvious. (Warning-- newbie here! Would like to put paragraph breaks in that but not sure how..)Zargulon 12:58, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

Kind of

Like this

(see source) --Dv 14:37, July 31, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks!Zargulon 15:12, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

• Keep Clearly a legitimate topic. CalJW 14:15, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
• Keep I don't see anything wrong with the article or the topic. --Dv 14:37, July 31, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete -- This article has been deleted before as a recreation of a vfd'd article; some other admin may wish to check to see if this should be speedied as well. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 15:38, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

• Keep Agree with all Zargulon's points on the content, but a legitimate subject. William Avery 16:32, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

• Be all this as it may, this was a recreation of an article that was already removed per VfD, and I have speedied it on that basis. If someone wants it restored, the correct route is Wikipedia:Votes for undeletion. -- Jmabel | Talk 19:37, July 31, 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.