Talk:Temple Rodef Shalom

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Temple Rodef Shalom article.
Article policies
This is a controversial topic that may be under dispute. Please read this page and discuss substantial changes here before making them.
Make sure to supply full citations when adding information and consider tagging or removing uncited/unciteable information.

Contents

[edit] Libby

[copied from the WP:BLPN#Lewis_Libby, where this "addition" was posted:[for context]: --NYScholar 21:57, 28 March 2007 (UTC) [updated: --NYScholar 09:53, 29 March 2007 (UTC)]

I would add to this discussion whether others think it appropriate to list Libby on the Temple Rodef Shalom page. He is the only congregant listed. Notmyrealname 20:24, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

If one knows of other notable congregants (members of the temple) who have articles about them in Wikipedia, one is free to add them, in keeping with Wikipedia guidelines and policies. [Note: I did not create the page on the temple, and I was not the user who originally added Lewis Libby to the article. After Libby's conviction, given the existence of a Wikipedia article on him, and the references to the temple membership in the reliable source provided by Ron Kampeas, as cited, I added the relevant source information and improved the wording of the sentence someone else had originally added....] Related question: Why is this temple notable enough for an article in Wikipedia? (I didn't create the article, and I don't know the answer to that question.) This "discussion" topic is perhaps more appropriate for Talk:Temple Rodef Shalom, where the user did not post it first before coming here to post it. I suggest that if one has a dispute about the content of that article on Temple Rodef Shalom, one needs to raise it on that talk page for further discussion by other users and/or to put that dispute somewhere else[....] --NYScholar 20:56, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Notability of the temple

[Added heading: On the question about the notability of the temple, for greater clarity: --NYScholar 10:01, 29 March 2007 (UTC)] [Added to this page for discussion. --NYScholar 21:57, 28 March 2007 (UTC)]

It is more notable than most high schools. There are Wikipedia inclusionists who feel that every high school in the United States is notable enough for an article by their mere existence. I have found that it is very difficult to fight such inclusionists. Quatloo 22:01, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
[Moved from the WP:BLPN#Lewis_Libby entry; it replies to [my] comment that I had already moved here. Off topic there. --NYScholar 22:05, 28 March 2007 (UTC)] [updated. --NYScholar 09:54, 29 March 2007 (UTC)]
The listing of Libby on this page is hardly off topic from whether the Temple should be listed on Libby's page. Now that we are here, however, is it accepted practice to single out individuals who happen to be members of houses of worship? What if it's reported that he rents from Netflix? Should we include his name on that page? Notmyrealname 01:21, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

[Please note: I myself listed "Lewis Libby" (now just "Libby") as a section heading in this talk page after the previous user began talking about this article in the WP:BLPN notice on Libby. I am hardly saying that the very subject that I have listed (as per the earlier heading "Lewis Libby") is "off topic" in this talk page; I moved it here because I think that here is where it belongs (not in the BLP noticeboard about Libby); re-read my comment. I am not replying to the previous user (I left his/her comment in the BLPNB; I simply copied it for context here. I am actually replying to Quatloo here, who was replying to me. I had already moved the piece of my comment that he [Quatloo] was replying to to this talk page, and therefore what he said had no referent and was "off topic" in the WP:BLPN. [updated.] --NYScholar 09:27, 31 March 2007 (UTC)]

This is not an article on Netflix (a commercial business).

The subject of this article is a temple. A temple is a membership organization as well as a "house of worship." Wikipedia articles on membership organizations frequently list their notable members. (The same way that Wikipedia articles on cities and states in the U.S. list their notable residents.) As a membership organization, this particular temple has many community-based projects and related committees, some of which include their online membership lists, including its organization of business people who belong to the temple; its "biz net"--a business networking group, with a link to members (names of members, their businesses, and what appear to be business telephone numbers)--on the site. The information is all publicly accessible through the temple's own publicly-accessible official website. N.B.: The posting of such information as individuals' personal telephone numbers and such information pertaining to personal identities (that might lead to personal identity theft or pose similar kind of danger) is not permitted in Wikipedia: WP:BLP. But non-libelous information published about a public figure in a reliable third-party source is permissible to convey in articles in Wikipedia according to WP:BLP#Public figures, and the Wikipedia-defined threshold pertaining to libel relating to a living person who is a public figure is not the same as for a living person who is a private figure. There is no way also that the mere mention that someone belongs to a temple borders on libel or demonstrates ill will. It is simply a fact-checked statement supported by a reliable third party source and other reliable third-party sources reprinting that source. --NYScholar 09:34, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Neutrality tag

I have tagged this article due to the recurrent deletions by others and false claims being made by them in the editing history. Libby was inserted by another editor on March 14, 2007; I corrected the sentence added and provided a reliable source for the information that the earlier editor had not provided (which is required). I provided a heading so that later editors could add additional members as they might become known. The way the original editor adding Libby's name had added it was problematic because it had no section heading. See the editing history and compare the previous edits from March 14 on. --NYScholar 23:12, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

The information added by the other user was:

Former National Security Aid to the Vice President I. Lewis Libby, recently made famous by the Plamegate scandal and his subsequent disputed obstruction of justice conviction, is a member of the congregation.

I tried to update and improve the wording of the sentence and added a source, which Wikipedia requires for documentation: It reads:

[edit] Notable members (former and/or current)

I provided the heading because there was none provided by the earlier editor and the material that he/she added about Libby appeared not to fit into the section it was in. The heading "Notable members" and then "Notable members (former and current)" is modeled on headings in Wikipedia for other organizations and for states/cities (Notable members; Notable residents; etc.); such a heading enables subsequent additions when they become known. These are all good-faith edits. I strenuously object to claims otherwise and refer those making them to WP:AGF, WP:NPA, and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. There appear to be a group of editors in Wikipedia deleting sourced information from articles dealing with subjects relating to Jewish subjects and Israel and trying to promote (push) their own POV in doing so. See: WP:POV and WP:POV-PUSH. --NYScholar 23:30, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Notes

  1. ^ Ron Kampeas, "Libby Jewish? Some Wonder How Neo-con's Faith Impacts Leak Scandal", Jewish Telegraphic Agency (JTA) ("The Global News Service of the Jewish People") 2 November 2005, accessed 16 March 2007; rpt. in Ron Kampeas, "Did Libby's Jewishness Impact the CIA Leak Scandal?" Jerusalem Post, Jewish Telegraphic Agency (JTA), 6 November 2005; updated 7 November 2005; accessed 16 March 2007.

[edit] Protection requested due to constant deletions by 3 other users

See the editing history and the above discussion. The other 3 users are deleting the material without prior comment on this talk page; making false charges in the editing history and in Talk:Lewis Libby. Lewis Libby is protected; in order to delete information that they object to in that article, they are attempting to delete it in this article. The information is factual and reliably sourced. --NYScholar 23:55, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

If there's any need for protection, it's because of your persistent WP:BLP violations, and the fact that you've reverted the page 6 times now. Jayjg (talk) 00:00, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
I have not [been the only one to have] "reverted the page 6 times now": you and the 2 other users you are acting in consort with have reverted the page over 4 times (violating WP:3RR taken together); my edits (beyond 3-4) involved adding neutrality tag, correcting the tag, making diction change, adding words to a heading in response to a comment by another user, etc. They are not reversions. Please stop harrassing me because you have been unable to delete reliably-sourced evidence that Libby is a member of a Jewish temple and Jewish from Wikipedia. Your obsession with that attempt to suppress (censor) this information is inappropriate and intellectually dishonest. It is also transparently so. --NYScholar 00:15, 20 April 2007 (UTC) [I was unaware that these changes that I had made in the heading amounted to a reverting of the material; I have added the bracketed qualification. See my talk page archive 4 for explanations of what I was attempting to correct in the heading and the tags. --NYScholar 14:04, 22 April 2007 (UTC)]