Misplaced Pages

:Articles for deletion/Beit HaShalom: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 23:41, 27 November 2008 editNsk92 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers22,682 editsm Beit HaShalom: grammar← Previous edit Revision as of 23:45, 27 November 2008 edit undoIsm schism (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users15,451 edits Beit HaShalom: replyNext edit →
Line 25: Line 25:
:*It has been covered for one event. Thanks. ] (]) 23:28, 27 November 2008 (UTC) :*It has been covered for one event. Thanks. ] (]) 23:28, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
::*I'm not aware of any policy that sets out a minimum number of notable events a subject must be involved with. ] <sub>]</sub> 23:37, 27 November 2008 (UTC) ::*I'm not aware of any policy that sets out a minimum number of notable events a subject must be involved with. ] <sub>]</sub> 23:37, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
:::*So for what is it notable? Aside from some coverage of a current event, there is no lasting notability. This is only a passing news story, and no reasons have been provided to prove otherwise. Thanks. ] (]) 23:45, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 23:45, 27 November 2008

Beit HaShalom

Beit HaShalom (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

This organization's article on wikipedia is the result of recentism. The subject has his little notability and is a "one event" matter. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 21:26, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

  • One of the many concerns I have with this article is recentism. All of this recent media coverage is over one event, the possession of a household. The wider importance of this event to Israel, Judaism and Religion has yet to be explained! As such, this article is about one recent event that has recieved some media coverage. Presently, I do not believe this house has enough notabilty for an article of its own. I am open to changing my mind as well, but at present, this article is about one recent event. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 22:00, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
    • Recentism is usually not a reason to delete an article. With the amount of media coverage this event got, I think it would be enough for its own article, and don't mind the article about this house (around which the event is based) being that article. The fact that it's a somewhat unique settler community reinforces the notability of the structure itself. -- Ynhockey 22:45, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Could you please explain more about the "university-level teaching institution?" This is the first I have heard of this information. What university is it related to? Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 22:27, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
I don't think that this provision is applicable here. We are talking about a fairly high-profile controversy that has been covered in the national and international media over the period of about 2 years, that ended up in the Israeli Supreme Court and that required involvement of the Israeli Prime Minister. I do not believe that this qualifies under "indiscriminate collection of information". Nsk92 (talk) 23:13, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
This is one event - this article is about one house that is having a court case issue that has recieved some media attention. This article is about nothing more. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 23:23, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
To some extent that is correct, although the event here is a bit difficult to define and the house itself is the center of controversy. However, even with single events, they become notable if they receive significant coverage over a prolonged period of time; that is what makes an event notable and worthy of an article. Nsk92 (talk) 23:32, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep- the subject of this article has been covered extensively in reliable sources. I'm satified that it's sufficiently noteworthy to be included here. Reyk YO! 23:26, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
  • So for what is it notable? Aside from some coverage of a current event, there is no lasting notability. This is only a passing news story, and no reasons have been provided to prove otherwise. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 23:45, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
Categories: