Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 10:24, 26 June 2014

History of the Jews in Nepal

History of the Jews in Nepal (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The article is purported to be about history, but the article describes no history, with the earliest date referred to being 1986, with absolutely no historical context or relevance. The article does not meet the notability criteria. Ubikwit_{見学/迷惑} 08:52, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Log/2014 June 19. —cyberbot I _Online 09:14, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
• Comment That may be an argument for renaming the article, but certainly not for deletion. RolandR (talk) 10:00, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
• Merge with Israel-Nepal relations. That is essentially what this article is about. L'Aquotique (talk) 10:06, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

That sounds like the most appropriate option.--Ubikwit_{見学/迷惑} 10:30, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nepal-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:16, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:16, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

• Keep - I would err on the side of assuming notability, as this article comes from a link in the almost-entirely-filled-out {{Asia in topic|History of the Jews in}} template. The topic seems pretty notable, and if the article could do with some (or a lot of) expansion, that's not a matter for AfD. ∴ ZX95 02:25, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

There is no' history to speak of whatsoever in the article. It is not an article bout history. Accordingly, not only is notable as history, and the article should be merged as per L'Aquotique, because it is not an article about anything else, properly speaking.--Ubikwit_{見学/迷惑} 03:39, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

• Keep for a number of reasons. Firstly, the current content of the article is mostly about the work of Chabad who are a Hasidic Orthodox religious Jewish outreach group that has nothing to do with the secular Jewish state of Israel as such, they are based out of Brooklyn, New York, USA, and it would not make sense to make that part of Nepal-USA relations either! Secondly, Jewish history spans 3,000+ years, while the modern state of Israel was founded only in 1948! "Jewish history" and "Israel" are not the same thing, if anything Israel as a topic is a sub-group of Jewish history. Nepal's history is also divided into different eras stretching back millennia and there is still lots of ongoing scholarship. Thirdly, Nepal is a unique country that straddles the Himalayas. Nepal is landlocked to the south by India on three sides and by China to the north. Thus Nepal's history is tied in with the history of (a) the Himalayas, (b) northern India, and (c) southern China -- and that is how one can find references that have a direct bearing on the "History of the Jews in Nepal"! Finally, therefore, see for example South Asian ethnic groups: "Indo-Aryans form the predominant ethno-linguistic group in Northern India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Nepal, Sri Lanka and the Maldives...Syrian Malabar Nasranis are descendents of both Hindu and Jewish converts to Christianity" and Googling "Jews + Himalayas", "Jews + northern India", "Jews + southern China" reveals a connection between Jews and Nepal and an intersection in Jewish history with the history of Nepal, see Origins and Migrations in the Extended Eastern Himalayas: ("...A second nation included the Jews and Arabs, the Assyrians..."); The Bnei Menashe of Northeastern India: ("The Bnei Menashe trace their journey from northern Israel to Assyria— modern-day Iraq—to Afghanistan, and through the Himalayas to Mongolia."); In the Himalayas and on the Indian Plains: (..."Syrian Jews (the tradesmen of 1,900 years ago)"...); Jews Have Been in China A Long, Long Time: ("...a 9th century Arab traveler wrote about his experiences, which included a report of a massacre of Christians, Moslems and Jews in southern China."); India Virtual Jewish History Tour: ("Migrations in the 16th and 17th centuries created important settlements of Jews from Persia, Afghanistan and Characin (Central Asia) in northern India and Kashmir."), and more like this, so please be more careful and do not jump to conclusions. Thank you, IZAK (talk) 07:08, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
  • • First, WP:NOTSOAPBOX and WP:NOTFORUM.

You mention some fringish sources to produce WP:OR in order to support you ivot!, which is inadmissible.

Bnei Menashe has absolutely no connection to Jews before

the Israeli Rabbi Eliyahu Avichail founded Amishav (Hebrew for "My People Return"), an organisation dedicated to locating the lost tribes of Israel and assisting aliyah. He learned of the group in northeastern India in 1983

Note one source or statement you make in that WP:WOT would confer a grain of notability on the article at issue.

Furthermore, now that you point out the connection of Chabad, the article seems like nothing more than a puff piece aimed at promoting the activities of that organization under false pretense.--Ubikwit_{見学/迷惑} 11:35, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi Ubikwit: Thank you for your attempt at a constructive response. However, the more you carry on the more confused and incoherent your responses become. First you want to connect this topic with "Israel" that has nothing to do with Chabad, then you all of a sudden realize (after I point it out yet) that this topic should be connected with "Chabad" and not so much with Israel. This reflects serious confusion that should have been thought through a lot better before you jump to nominate complex topics for anything. Sorry to say it but your entire argument just seems to come off as WP:IDONTLIKEIT and WP:LIKE which is not good enough here. In any case, the sum of all the sub-topics in this article, i.e. Jews in Nepal, Nepal's relationship with Israel, Chabad's work in Nepal etc all come under the rubric of History of the Jews in Nepal regardless of their numbers, their origins, when they showed up or what they do there, it is all WP:V and based on WP:RS and has much room for growth, see WP:DONOTDEMOLISH and WP:CHANCE. As for your critique of my post, you owe me an apology, because as I pointed out, the correct way to start researching this topic is by looking at the history of the region that Nepal lies in which is in the Himalayas and its geographic surroundings that has been in existence way before the formation of "Nepal" as it is known today and as my citations above show in the course of time various types of Jews have been crisscrossing it for millennia. Thank you, IZAK (talk) 20:28, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

No, none of what you have described falls under the rubric of History of anything.

Why do you continue to make baseless assertions, such as that about "'Nepal' as it is known today'"? Do you think you know some WP:TRUTH that is not represented in reliable sources? Misplaced Pages requires RS verification, Misplaced Pages:Verifiability, not truth

And then there is the assertion regarding the geography of the Himalayas, which claims that "various types of Jews have been crisscrossing it for millennia", which is yet another fanatsy that would have nothing to due with Nepal, as the area is known today, at any rate. Moreover, you can't produce a single reliable source that supports that fanciful view of history.

The sole constructive contribution you have made is to point out that the article is as much about Chabad as Israel. Nothing in your WP:SOAPBOXING supports WP:NOTABILITY regarding the stub at issue.

To ask me for an apology based on my rational and policy-based refutation of your unsourced POV-pushing assertions verges on being trollish.--Ubikwit_{見学/迷惑} 02:36, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

• Keep and link to WP:ODD. Bearian (talk) 17:32, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

That article in no way establishes notability for this article in terms of history.

The only thing odd about it is that it was able to be created in the first place on Misplaced Pages with no relevant content related to the title.

The relevant content seems to belong under two separate articles, according to a couple of the posts above. Some of it belongs in Israel-Nepal relations, and other in Chabad. There has not been a single reliably published statement verifying any historical connection between Nepal and Jews, and according to the first line of the stub, even today

The permanent Jewish community in Nepal is very small and consists largely of diplomatic officials and Chabad staff.

. --Ubikwit_{見学/迷惑} 17:51, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

• Keep per Bearian and numerous references. One comment, I think the article is not only about the history of Jews in Nepal, but more about relations between the two countries, as well as about Israelis/Jews in Nepal.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 23:28, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Yet another unsupported !vote to keep without establishing notability. There has still not been a single reliably sourced statement that mentions the "history of Jews in Nepal".

In fact, the sole hit returned by a Google search of "history of Jews in Nepal", is to the Misplaced Pages article.

This is becoming a farcical discussion, with me being the sole vote to Delete/Merge, and only one other editor suggesting a Merge.--Ubikwit_{見学/迷惑} 02:36, 24 June 2014 (UTC)12:59, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Incidentally, I just noticed your changes to the article, and reverted them, as per the edit summary. The attempt you made is illustrative of the problem for the purpose of this discussion though, so I note it here.--Ubikwit_{見学/迷惑} 02:47, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Frankly, Ubikwit, please remember to act in good faith. You want this article to be deleted. I added references. You removed them. The additions are all relevant to the topic of Jews in Nepal, what they do, their interactions with Nepali, and so forth, that is, their history. Perhaps the article could be better named but this is not a reason to revert references.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 10:53, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Do you understand what history is? There is no "their" history of Jews in Nepal since the 1990s. That is to near in the recent past to encompass a period during which something called a history could be established.

Don't say that the article could be renamed, on the one hand, and then make no suggestions to that end while attempting to substantiate the present article by adding references and material that do not relate to history.

The article is not called "Jews in Nepal"", incidentally, but if that is a suggestion, then that raises the question as to whether an article with that title would meet the notability criteria is another question. I imagine that it wouldn't.

If all it takes is to establish an embassy and have a religious organization active in a given country, then Misplaced Pages would have an History of the ^~^ article for every country that has an embassy in Nepal, and by extension, an article for each respective country that has an embassy in any country fr every country in which a given country has an embassy, which is not notable in and of itself other than perhaps for inclusion on a List article. So the suggestion by L'Aquotique has merit, but probably wouldn't encompass the material on Chabad.

There is no rationale in your arguments that is supported by policy. Furthermore, I have referenced relevant policies to which you have not responded, but instead attempted a rhetorical redefinition of history as "their history". Misplaced Pages is not a blog about "Jews in Nepal".--Ubikwit_{見学/迷惑} 11:23, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

History is what happened in the past. It can span thousands of years; or centuries; or decades. Like it or not, the topic History of Jews in Nepal encompasses what Jewish people, who are inside Nepal, do, say, think, act, etc. When I revamped the article by adding many references to make a better article here, you reverted it; in my view, this seems like an underhanded last-ditch attempt to sway the final decision regarding this deletion discussion. While perhaps there could be a better article title, it does not make sense to merge this article into Israel-Nepal relations, since the latter article is about government-to-government relations, while this article is about cultural ties among non-official people, particularly, Jewish people in Nepal. So when a Jewish artist brings Dead Sea rocks to Nepal, it is part of the history of Jews in Nepal. Or, a Jewish climber rescues a Turkish climber, in Nepal, it belongs in the article. That it did not happen in the 1700s is irrelevant; that it happened in the past, is.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 11:53, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages has notability criteria, for which the present article does not qualify being called an article on the history of anything. You have wikilinked to the history article, but apparently you don't understand the meaning of history.

There simply doesn't seem to be a significant enough presence of Jews in Nepal for there to be any other type of article that might meet the notability criteria, either.

Your mentioning of culture, for example, with respect to what i gather was a hypothetical example of an artist bringing Dead Seあ rocks to Nepal would not merit an independent article, even if the artist were notable. As I said Misplaced Pages is not a blog about Jews in Nepal.

Accusing me of being underhanded for reverting material that does not describe history is making a false accusation about conduct to try and win a content dispute. Please do not do that again.--Ubikwit_{見学/迷惑} 12:44, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Suppose an article is up for deletion. Another contributor adds references, improves the article. These are reverted. So an article on the chopping block, without references, gets references added, but is then again sliced up to have no references. Sure seems like a severe violation of Wiki-etiquette. See, if I find another source suggesting strong historical ties between Jews and Nepalis, such as here, suggesting 52 years of exchanges (ten, count 'em 10, decades, plus two years to boot), if I try to add it, it will get reverted. So, what can be done?--Tomwsulcer (talk) 15:13, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Further, the subject of recentism is often misunderstood. It does not give any contributor the right to delete or revert any recent information willy nilly, like if it happened in the past two years or ten years. Rather, it is about balance, with the idea being to not overly-tip an article towards only recent events, to the detriment of the overall subject. If an article is about a 50-year history of Jews in Nepal, then deleting information because it happened within the past decade does not make sense. Recentism should be applied as a test of the whole article, not any particular piece of information, otherwise Misplaced Pages would not carry any information about stuff that happened in the past year or so.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 15:13, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

The article already mentions that diplomatic relations were established in the 1960s, that a lot of Israelis backpack there, and that Chabad has a presence there (running lodging houses for backpackers, apparently). The only new point in the source you presented is a commemorative stamp, which is basically trivial, and is relates to diplomatic relations between two states. It is an exaggeration to characterize that source as "suggesting strong historical ties between Jews and Nepalis".

After diplomatic relations were established there is no mention of anything until when? Oh, 1986, in relation to a Jewish religious ceremony for Jewish travelers, not Nepalis. The next mention is 1999, in relation to the same ceremony, taken over by Chabad from the Israeli embassy. Let's paraphrase that. The entire history of Jews in Nepal is covered by the establishment of diplomatic relations, and the conducting of a Jewish religious ceremony for Jewish travelers.

A notable article on history that content does not make.

You are free to add anything of relevance to the article that is about the topic of the article. The only thing misunderstood here is apparently the concept of history. If the above source is the best you can find, the article simply doesn't meet the notability criteria.--Ubikwit_{見学/迷惑} 15:35, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Let's let the closing admin decide.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 16:24, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Of course.

I just noticed that my google search above omitted the "the" from the title, so I retried it. Every result on the first page returned from a google search of the article title either is the Misplaced Pages article, or points to it. (The last result on the page is a miss because it is a search engine that removed the quotes )

If there are no other sources out there, which seems likely considering thethere is probably no need to prolong this process any further.--Ubikwit_{見学/迷惑} 08:03, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

• Move otherwise Delete It seems to me that the accurate naming of this article is pretty difficult. The best that I can manage is something on the lines of "Jewish presence in Nepal". I fully agree that there is no history, at least in my understanding of history. There can, however, be a lot of presence. The Israeli army can be a tough experience and there has now become a fairly established tradition for young Israelis to get away from Israel upon release and, it seems, get high. (edit: My strongest positive memory of Israeli Jews in Nepal was of an Israeli friend smoking a splif at someething like 5km altitude somewhere to the north of Dingboche and en route to the southern Everest Base Camp). The two main destinations for typically young Israelis are South America and the Himalayas and I have signs in Hebrew in non Jewish owned shops in both Kathmandu and Pokhara. The vast majority of Jews in Nepal are Israelis with the possible exception of Chabadists who are only there for other Jews. (Edit: I have no personal bad experiences with Chabadists but have born witness to comments to indicate that some religious Jews can have opinions as follows (end edit) Other people can sometimes be regarded as barely that). The diplomatic relations mentioned would probably have been something along the lines of a letter with little great substance being sent each way. Its hardly history. However there is definitely a justification for the writing of some form of article about the very lively presence of Jews in Nepal. (edit: an article entitled history would have a lessened chance of encapsulating a wider experience of Jews in Nepal) They've held some great parties (edit: although the best ones were in India in popular Israeli destinations Manali, Himachal Pradesh and Kasol. I also object to the comments by IZAK: "attempt at a constructive response" and "the more you carry on the more confused and incoherent your responses become." I don't know if you are Israeli but this seems synonymous with darker side of Israeli Rudeness). Gregkaye (talk) 22:37, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Ah yes Gregkaye, let's revise history and just call everything that happens in history -- "presence" instead, like instead of History of the Jews in Germany lets rename it to Presence of the Jews in Germany etc etc etc and all the other dozens of articles in Category:Jewish history by country will be "Presence of the Jews in ____" even if the Jews are no longer present, or what amount of time will then qualify as valid "presence" according to this new notion of yours? Goodbye history, hello presence. And no I do not have a "darker side", just a hard-working editor, and it seems that both you and the nominator haven't heard of WP:NPA when the flow of the argument goes against you (he labels me as "troll"-like while you label me as a sorta "Darth Vader" from the "dark side" or is that just another way of getting at an editor you perceive to be "too Jewish" for your liking?) To repeat, Chabad has nothing to do with Israel-Nepal relations it is a Brooklyn, USA based movement, while Israel-Nepal relations is definitely a part of the modern history of the Jews in Nepal. The other refs I cite about the need to look into Jews and the Himalayas is also relevant. Sorry to say it, but your !Vote also makes no sense, as if to say if historical facts do not meet the little narrow box you create for it, then it must be deleted does not help to build and grow Misplaced Pages as an all-inclusive encyclopedia. Thank you, IZAK (talk) 07:44, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

• Ah yes IZAK, you make weak comparisons … and this is even when you use a potential trump card: when facing any form of opposition, whether its justified or not, mention the holocaust. Of course there is no argument that there is a genuine and tragic history of minority groups in Germany having a total of 13 million lives of Jews, gypsies, blacks etc. being lost. But that is not a question that has relevance here. The question regards a potential title for this article. I have indicated the fact that there is a regular presence of largely Israeli Jews in Himilayan regions such as Nepal and the locality. The wider story relates to present travel habits of Jewish people without which there would be no presence of organisations such as Chabad in Nepal. I'd interpret that it is the causative factor that is the important one in a picture and that reactions concerning comparatively minimal numbers of people are a secondary concern. Who said anything about saying goodbye to objective and fair studies of history. Again, the ONLY discussion is on the most appropriate title for the article.

I also have to now deal with some superfluous issues to the actual discussion. You mention WP:NPA so can I remind you that your very first words in this discussion were: “Hi Ubikwit: Thank you for your attempt at a constructive response. However, the more you carry on the more confused and incoherent your responses become." Good God man! I responded to those comments for two reasons: 1) Chabad representatives constitute a tiny proportion of Jews in Nepal and 2). The person you attacked wasn't even the one that first suggested an Israel Nepal association. L'Aquotique had suggested Merge with Israel-Nepal relations and in this context and at that point Ubikwit interpreted. That sounds like the most appropriate option. Since that time he commented that Some of it belongs in Israel-Nepal relations, and other in Chabad.  Ubikwit has shown signs that he can change his views when presented with correct information and, as far as I have seen, he has not justified the accusation that the “more you carry on the more confused and incoherent your responses become." I commented that these were rude and I put this perceived rudeness in a relevant context. When travelling in the region of the subcontinent of India I had many conversations on the topic of rudeness. In this article I made a link regarding a frequently discussed topic of Israeli rudeness but within the search list the first item mentioned concerned a perceived rudeness of Israeli shopkeepers. In reference to this I interpreted your rude comments as being paralleled by a dark side of the mentioned rudeness. We can also note that many things have dark sides including fantasy creations like the force in Star Wars, real things like any physical object in sunlight and various works of art such as Pink Floyd's moon. You also mentioned “two Jewish” for my liking and it seems that I must also make defence against accusations that have no justification. I mentioned “My strongest positive memory of Israeli Jews in Nepal was of an Israeli friend smoking a splif at someething like 5km altitude”. He was a hilarious and great companion. I mentioned that “ I have no personal bad experiences with Chabadists”, additionally mentioned “great parties” and encourage an effort for “encapsulating a wider experience of Jews in Nepal”. I have no problem regarding people being “Too Jewish” just comments that are "Too rude".

You further assert “Sorry to say it, but your !Vote also makes no sense” and I take that sorry in the same context as your earlier “Thank you for your attempt at” comment. I made clear, unconfused and coherent arguments. I could go on to mention the implied connotations of a “no sense” comment but I'm sure you can work them out yourself. Gregkaye (talk) 10:24, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

• AfD debates (Indiscernible or unclassifiable topic)
• AfD debates