Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Orthodox Jewish outreach

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 keep. John254 01:19, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orthodox Jewish outreach

No sources given and article is poorly written. Yossiea ^(talk) 18:11, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletions. -- Yossiea ^(talk) 18:12, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I second this nomination, if external resources cannot be added it should be deleted--יודל 18:14, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

~~* Delete~~ Yossiea ^(talk) 18:16, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment You created the page. FYI. You can do a CSD as the page author. Yossiea ^(talk) 18:16, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes i did create it but if u think its not according to wikipedia policy i want it deleted. Although i am rushing to add more external links but if in the end of the day i cannot appease you i wont want to be in contempt of breaking wiki policy, so it should be deleted by all means--יודל 18:21, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey; see WP:IGNORE (yes, a rule on ignoring rules). If you think you can find more sources then we won't delete untill we see what you find. In the meantime, I'll !vote Hold on to see if it can be source--Phoenix 15 18:51, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And what are all those links at the botton?--Phoenix 15 18:52, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is hilarious. An editor creates a page and five minutes later votes to delete it.--Yeshivish 18:56, 21 September 2007 (UTC) sockpuppet GRBerry 03:20, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Why is it so hilarious i created that article in the belief that a category should have its own article an other user has noted that its not proper to have it, and i agreed, but i now urge that user to hold on maybe i still can appease his concerns. have u ever thought that this place is a community. i will not fight if u vote to delete i will look if i can appease u if not consensus will win. and if hilarity ensues in this process take a good laugh it is healthy.--יודל 19:12, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hold On since i am working heavely on the article i beleave all users should not vote delete yet, because I major Jewish holiday is coming up and i will not be able to add more external links for the next day.--יודל 19:03, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- This year, Yom Kippur is only one day.--Yeshivish 19:07, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - Yes u r right i stay corrected.--יודל 19:12, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The general subject of Orthodox Jewish outreach, called Kiruv in Hebrew, is a very notable topic that easily passes Wikipedia's notability requirements and could readily be expanded into a lengthy and informative article. Just do a Google search on Kiruv. Chabad-Lubavitch, a highly notable Orthodox religious movement, is famous for its kiruv practices but there are many other Orthodox organizations involved as well. There is some reference to this in the Baal Teshuva article. Best, --Shirahadasha 19:22, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, as Shirahadasha says, kiruv (the topic of this article) easily passes WP notability requirements. --MPerel 20:59, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As Yom Kippur is about to start, I won't be able to add sources right away, but they are readily available. The Orthodox Jewish congregation where I will be attending services over the next 24 hours will be conducting an introductory service as part of the outreach efforts of one of the programs described in this article. The subject is notable, the article is reasonably-well constructed, but it needs some of the plethora of sources available to be added to the article. Alansohn 21:04, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

*Conditional Keep important issue, but must be sourced.--Truest blue 04:16, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

keep sources exist - it is irrelevant to the AFD whether they are added now or later. Don't use AFD as a threat to clean up articles. Jon513 20:07, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I assume you guys have all repented by now, so gofixit. Next time, don't play games with AfD to make a POINT, but use the {{underconstruction}} tag. DGG (talk) 03:47, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I've repented for the past year, which lives plenty of room for this year's list. I still don't understand the circumstances of the article's creation or of this AfD, but I agree that sources should be added, and i look forward to your joining in on the fun. Alansohn 03:54, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
NOTE: This article is just a complete cut and paste of material from the Baal teshuva article. It was not written or created by user:Yidisheryid, he merely created a new name because until now it was part of the Baal teshuva article and because he first "creates" it, and then "agrees" to have it "deleted" it needs to be questioned if this is WP:DISRUPT and WP:POINT. I fully agree with User:Jon513: Don't use AFD as a threat to clean up articles. Or just a back-door way to get rid of material from articles that one is against. Naughty-naughty, but don't try such games here! IZAK 05:31, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep because it is a notable topic and it has the making/s of a key lead article especially since there is an entire Category:Orthodox Jewish outreach. IZAK 08:55, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I am changing my vote. I never realized that this page was a target of user YY. This page should remain, and I withdraw my support for the deletion. Yossiea ^(talk) 13:40, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep quite notable. gidonb 14:11, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Keep, or merge back into ba'al teshuva. Avi 21:34, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep article is important and notable. Culturalrevival 16:47, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, rename to kiruv rechokim. JFW | T@lk 23:07, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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.