Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Six Laws of Adam
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 per consensus. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 19:43, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Six Laws of Adam
POV fork of Noahide Laws. There are six laws, to which a seventh was added, but no primary source refers to the original six as "Six Laws of Adam". JFW | T@lk 19:18, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
- Delete and merge into Noahide Laws if possible. --Wildnox(talk) 19:48, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
- Delete, there's nothing to merge. I don't know exactly what's "POV" about this fork, but it is completely unnecessary and contributes nothing new. — coelacan talk — 12:32, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
- Delete, waste of time and probably a WP:NEO. IZAK 13:33, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
- Delete unless there is solid evidence for this expression being used in a notable context. - Jmabel | Talk 05:31, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
- Keep the term is referred to in the Talmud, numerous commentaries and Maimonides. What more can you ask for? Where does "Seven Laws of Noah" come from, exactly the same sources. Please {{hangon}}, im getting the exact quotes. frummer 20:55, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
- The concept is mentioned, but not by this term. In any case, the content is really only relevant in the context of the Noahide laws. JFW | T@lk 22:23, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
- The concept is mentioned with this (translated) term in the Midrash, Mishna and a Gemara, and in Yad Hachazaka of the Rambam. I'm sourcing. Furthermore they are relevant out of the context of the Noahide laws too, since they where in place for ten generations until they where broken, that was an important era in the Torah time-line. frummer 03:48, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
- The concept is mentioned, but not by this term. In any case, the content is really only relevant in the context of the Noahide laws. JFW | T@lk 22:23, 27 December 2006 (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.
