Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aharon Kotler

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 Speedy keep, clearly notable, WP:SNOW. NawlinWiki (talk) 20:12, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Aharon_Kotler[edit]

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

No workable references and has been marked as such for quite some time now CapMan07008 (talk) 00:49, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am no maven when it comes to finding (and adding) sources, but he is one of the most famous American Jewish leaders of the 20th century. Wikipedia would be simply incomplete without an article on Rabbi Aharon Kotler.Nerguy (talk) 02:24, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletion discussions. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 02:39, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't even wrong. --Cimon Avaro; on a pogostick. (talk) 03:35, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep One of the leading scholars of his generation, the article includes a number of sources and other material, such as this obituary in The New York Times provide additional reliable and verifiable sources establishing notability. Alansohn (talk) 03:39, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Snowball Keep. Notability easily verifiable. JFW | T@lk 06:00, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
keep keep keep oh be serious, ok? — alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 06:08, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep Leading rabbi of great importance and recognition. Lack of references is not in itself an indication of lack of notability. Debresser (talk) 14:44, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep. I believe this article has reached the point where notability is easily established. The page is well sourced, well written, and this is one of the several AFD pages that we editors have to waste our time with. Tinton5 (talk) 17:55, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 17:21, 29 August 2011 (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.