Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shmuel Yerushalmi

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 no consensus to delete, default to keep. I've tried to discount the less helpful comments, which were - in about equal parts - in the vein of "keep because I like him" (in the first part of the discussion) and "delete because he's not notable" (in the later part of the discussion). In both parts of the discussion there are also some commenting patterns that cause me to recall that canvassing or puppeting is not permitted in Wikipedia deletion processes. Among the editors who evaluated the specific coverage that Shmuel Yerushalmi has received, there is no consensus as to whether or not it meets the criteria of WP:BIO. Sandstein 08:02, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shmuel Yerushalmi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

NN unpublished "protest poet", casually mentioned in one news story. Coordinated promotion effort both here and in hewiki. Delete. - Tragic Baboon (banana receptacle) 15:39, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes. However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Israel-related deletions. - Tragic Baboon (banana receptacle) 15:39, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Shmuel is not unpublished. I have seen his works in translation in Al Ittihad. His poems were certainly notable enough to gain the attention of the Israeli Internal Security authorities. The references at on the article are sufficient to demonstrate WP:N. Protest poets are rare in Israeli society, and I do not know any other case of a poet who has made the transition from right wing Zionism to anti-Zionist communism. He is a contravertial individual and you may not approve of his political ideas. But the deletion policy clearly states

  "XfD (deletion) processes are not a way to complain or remove material that is personally disliked, whose perspective is against ones beliefs, or which is not yet presented neutrally."

  Abu ali 06:54, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • • Eh, assume good faith. Of course his politics are repugnant to me, but that is not why I nominated him for deletion. I resent the supposition. Noam Chomsky's politics are also repugnant to me, but I do not dispute his claim to notability. - Tragic Baboon (banana receptacle) 14:32, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Abu Ali, "Protest poets" are anything but rare in Israeli society, in fact non protest poets are rare. We don't need every single one of them, only the notable ones. This is clearly a speedy delete. Amoruso 03:52, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• delete It is quite possible that he will become a notable activist and perhaps a notable poet, and I wish him well at both, but I dont think he is N quite yet vote changed, see below. .DGG 07:24, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep:I think that the testimony of a country´s Security Serice when they investiagate a radical activist and consider him dangerous and inform him that they keep an eye on him, and this is reported by reputable media both in the country itslef and internationally, is a reliable proof of finding him notable as an activist. The Security Service can be considered an impartical witness, they have no interest in Wikipedia, they only have an interest in which activists is notable and which one is negligable from their point of view, and they clearly consider yerushalmi notable. Adam Keller 23:11, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
• KeepWhy delete this? Yerushalmi is a well-known poet and activist. His arrest and interrogation were widely noted around the world; his comments are frequently quoted; and his poems (in Hebrew at least) widely available. The claim that he is non-notable is wholly spurious. --RolandR 02:12, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

note to admin: Abu Ali, Adam Keller and RonaldR come to each other for support on disputes/edits^{[1][2][3][4][5][6] etc.} - personally, i feel their voices should be counted as 1 vote... i'm neutral about this article, i never heard of him but i wouldn't mind giving him an article on wiki. Jaakobou 07:22, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jaakobou's opinion above is prejudiced and uncalled-for. There are over 1.5 million articles on English Wikipedia, and I had not come across this one until I saw it mentioned on User talk:Adam Keller; nobody canvassed me for support. I have, however, herad of Shmuel Yerushalmi, and have previously, off-Wikipedia, forwarded his poems to friends. So I agree that he is notable and deserving of an entry in Wikipedia, and I object -- quite genuinely and independently -- to deleting the article. In any case, Abu Ali's message to Adam Keller was transparent and available for all to see, so it can hardly be considered an underhand attempt to subvert Wikipedia. But whi knows how many off-wiki messages may have been exchanged by editors trying to delete this article. Any attempt to discount our opinions will be strongly resisted. RolandR 14:37, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I also heard of my friend Assaf you want to see some of his poems ? He forwarded them to me in ICQ. How lovely. My little sister also wrote a few nice poems. Not notable, it's really a speedy delete. Amoruso 03:44, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP: I opposite to idea to delete a article about Shmuel Yerushalmi, becouse, Yerushalmi this well known exelent protest poet. I think, that this will be not according to justice and not according to moral. to delete so known and great poet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yuval Halperin (talk • contribs) — Yuval Halperin (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Delete: I have a blog whence I post all the talkbacks I had written to news articles, in addition I compose and publish there many other political and general articles, if he deserves an article here on English Wikiepdia, then so do I and half the world. He's not influential, maybe he will be some day, but these days he's no different than any other blogger. He claims to a public figure? Try a self proclaimed public figure maybe. His interrogation was a nonevent, type in his name on both Hebrew and English Google and show me a single signifcant news source that covers this? freearmy — freearmy (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Exactly, I'm starting articles on other blogs from Bama Chadasha, if that's a new criteria in wikipedia, truly embarrassing this article was even created. Amoruso 03:48, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep we are getting used to it: attempts to remove the biography of anybody critical of Israel. Huldra 12:40, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP: Yerushalmi is a strong poetic voice in a time that postmodern artists have lost track of what happens around them and don't know when to take position. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.178.48.206 (talk • contribs)

KEEP: I think. that very important to keep a article about Shmuel Yerushalmi, becouse Yeruhalmi is ones along poets write hebrew, that write against Zionism and in support of the peace and equality in relations between midlle eastern peoples. Hes very high voice for stabilisation and human rights. Him voice support to struggle against imperialistic wars and for socialic justace around the world. I wish to propose to cancel all plans and tryings in target to delete a article about Shmuel Yerushalmi, and to understand, that all trying to delete it, this political act, against freedom and justice. Attia al-Asam — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.130.76.246 (talk • contribs)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 16:34, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Relisting comment: Could people please avoid WP:AADD and discuss whether this man is notable under the criteria of WP:BIO or not? Sandstein 16:34, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per WP:N. The poet is "the subject of multiple, non-trivial, reliable published works, whose sources are independent of the subject itself." He has numerous news articles about himself, about his initiatives, interviews, etc. -- Black Falcon 22:35, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I agree with Black Falcon. As the subject of multiple independent articles, he is notable. --Falcorian ^(talk) 23:52, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. Initially a Delete, but I'd like to see if there is a significant entry on the Hebrew wikipedia for this guy before I decide. It currently reads like a user page. The Prince 01:08, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Have a look at [7] ابو علي 16:55, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete -- sorry, but just not notable; not a single reliable source to be found about this article's subject, just passing mentions in a year-old French news agency article. Should he gain prominence and have actual, verifiable published material about him, not merely self-published, then he might have an article. Wikipedia is not a soap box; inclusion of articles about individuals to promote particular ideologies, without any significance/importance, is just not appropriate.--Leflyman^Talk 01:15, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, even if casually in a news story it makes a verifiable source Alf photoman 01:17, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment -- everyone will be famous for 15 minutes. By your criteria, I should have an article -- and probably you, too. Wikipedia has a greater requirement for notability than a mention in a single news story.--Leflyman^Talk 01:26, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. "Yeruhalmi is ones along poets write hebrew, that write against Zionism and in support of the peace and equality": He writes against Zionism indeed, though the support of peace and equality lies in the eye of the beholder - anyway, while that stance might seem worthy to some, I fail to see what makes him notable by WP:N standards. Wait until he gets his poetry published by serious publishing houses and reconsider then. Publishing vaguely "in different literary and political sites," is pathetic, even if these unnamed cites should be named eventually. --tickle me 01:41, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Shmuel Yerushalmi publishes his poetry and essays in an open web forum and participates also in real life political activities. He is not notable by the Wikipedian standards set in WP:N and WP:BIO. But, as DGG correctly points out above, this may of course change in the future. gidonb 01:55, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

*Weak delete Was interviewed in Sikur Memukad (whose reliability I am unsure of) but together may be enough to make arguably notable. However, a single mention and a very one sided interview is not enough to write an article. I can't find any other sources in English or hebrew that would be non-trivial reliable sources. JoshuaZ 01:56, 19 February 2007 (UTC) Changing position to weak keep since he is reffered to [8] as well-known (obviously highly partisan source but still relevant).JoshuaZ 01:59, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Could not find any secondary published sources about this Shmuel Yerushalmi. All I could find was a mention on IndyMedia (that is not a reliable source as anyone can contribute "articles" to it.) ≈ jossi ≈ (talk)
• Delete This guy writes poems on the internet blog website called "Bama Chadasha". It's like writing an article about a popular wikipedian, not that he's that popular in that blog website either btw. He might deserve mention in the Tali Fahima article if the story is credible, but that's it. He doesn't meet the notable criteria to have an article about him or we'll have one on every enthusiastic blogger. Amoruso 02:03, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per gidonb. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 02:36, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete since it doesn't seem that there are any non-trivial reliable sources. --Akhilleus (talk) 03:06, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Clearly not a cause celebre yet. JFW | T@lk 07:05, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete- WP should not be a part of a promotional campaign of someone non-notable. ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 12:12, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - non notable, as the paucity of external references n the article shows. Isarig 15:01, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete No reliable, independent third-party sources to establish his notability. Beit Or 17:13, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as it violates WP:NN and also WP:COI as well as WP:NOT#SOAPBOX and WP:NOT#WEBSPACE. IZAK 07:05, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, Shmuel is a poet, and he is anti-sionist. There are not many poets, and not many anti-zionists, in Israel. So the article about him should be kept
  • —The preceding unsigned comment was added by P. Canarutto (talk • contribs) 08.51 UTC, 20 February 2007. RolandR 00:55, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • For the closing admin: Please note this is a new user's first edit. [9] gidonb 10:16, 20 February 2007 (UTC) [reply]
• Strong keep I have changed my vote from delete, on the basis of the evidence of publication, and the apparent attempt to delete the article on what might possibly in some instances be political grounds. I express appreciate to the eds. who clarified this, for I had not initially realized. DGG 11:40, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Per Leflyman and tickleme. This person is not notable now. Heck, I'VE written poetry in Hebrew, where is MY article?! Just being in a small subcategory doesn't make you notable, otherwise we should have an article on afghani poets in British Guyana, there are not too many of those either. Standard notability req's do not seem to have been met, so the article should be deleted. Avi 18:18, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete He is an obscure, unknown political polemicist. Guy Montag 19:56, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I don't know if there are Afghani poets in Guyana (which is not British any more, it is a soverign state). If there were, they might well have gotten a Wikipedia article, Wikipedia has pages on all kinds of small minorities in all kinds of places. And if an Afghani poet in Guyana got investigated by the Guyanan Security Services for a controversial political poem, that might well make him noteworthy. By the way, how come so many people take such an intensive passionate interest in an obscure, unknown political polemicist? Adam Keller

21:20, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

• • This is the second vote of this user. Beit Or 21:21, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • I did not expect to be counted twice (anyway, this is not a vote). I just wanted to refer to the arguments of the people writing before me.Adam Keller

21:22, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

• Comment an unusual and impressive number of editors have turned up to vote delete. Many of them are familiar to me and routinely revert my edits on sight. But they haven't put forward reasoned arguments for deletion beyond assertions of lack of notability (based on ignoring the citations in the article itself. More significant are the contributions of JoshuaZ and DGG who both changed their votes from delete to keep after examining the evidence and finding that the requirements for notability have been met. Will their voices be heard, or will their voices be drowned out by those who want to erase pro-peace Israelis from Wikipedia? We will see. ابو علي 16:48, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong keep; the nomination blurb has been proven incorrect (no harm done by the nom though for listing it on Afd); the subject meets WP:BIO and WP:V is not an issue. John Vandenberg 22:30, 23 February 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.