Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Jewish Americans (2nd nomination)

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 of the debate was keep. Sjakkalle (Check!) 13:43, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

List of Jewish Americans[edit]

This AFD can be closed on Speedy Keep basis now that it was reformed.

Actually, the correct closing would be consensus Peyna 04:28, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
If that exists, then yes. StabRule 06:11, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Read before voting: Seeing as some people get confused by this nomination, I will attempt to explicate what this nomination is for. This afd is up in order to come to the consensus that this list should be cleared and made into an index for the duplicate lists that already exist. If everyone agrees it is fine to do that, then this afd can be closed. StabRule 21:49, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This should either be deleted or have links to the smaller categories (Jewish American Show Business figures, etc.). There's no point, that even I can see, to having this huge page and the bunch of separate pages that are essentially replicates of it.Vulturell 18:43, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I will attempt to explicate what this nomination is for - If the nomination is not for deletion, why is it here? Peyna 00:21, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Originally the idea WAS for it to be up for deletion - but as soon as the page is deleted it will be used as an index. This is a common occurence for pages of the like. If we agree to turn it into an index then there's no need to continue this vote though. StabRule 01:16, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Then I invite you to merge this with all of the other lists and turn this into an index. There was no need to bring this to an AfD vote before taking other more appropriate actions. Peyna 01:59, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Look, though I appreciate you compromising, I know that this would not turn out the same if I had put it in the TALK page. Plus my original intention was to keep this big list and just delete the smaller ones, which I had closed (albeit, I wasn't suppose to close my own AFD nominations or something like that). StabRule 02:22, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Notice Putting this up top since it is important; I have begun to split the list into smaller lists and so far have completely with the grouping for Academics. I think this should be enough to satisfy most of the people here. Peyna 02:26, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Update I have completed my work on subdividing the list; please review it; I think this should be good enough for the article to survive AfD and move remaining discussions on the topic to the talk page. Thanks. Peyna 02:55, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete or Delete content and Link to Smaller PagesVulturell 18:43, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or Delete content and Link to Smaller Pages Exactly as Vulturell said StabRule 20:58, 26 November 2005 (UTC) (unknown anonymous editor)[reply]
Arniep, clearly you do not understand. You cannot vote "keep" on both this list and the smaller separate lists - for they are identical. You need to make up your mind on which to choose. If you feel that the smaller lists should be kept than please state so and STATE that you want this page cleared and only used as an index for the smaller lists. Otherwise people might not know where you stand. StabRule 03:30, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
comment Your own vote (Delete content and Link to Smaller Pages) means exactly the same as what I said, you can keep the current page and merely remove the list content if it is already duplicated and then add links to the appropriate pages. Arniep 03:36, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
If we agree on that then fine - that is all I want to do - clear this page. StabRule 05:20, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep per my longstanding policy and Martin Niemöller. Hey can we do Catholics again tomorrow? Can we vote on that? That was more fun than this Jew stuff and I miss them. -- JJay 03:34, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Catholics are masterful.Vulturell 05:52, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Please see what this vote is about before putting "keep" - Thanks. StabRule 05:20, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I thought it was about Jews. That was why I voted Strong Keep, or was it delete? So many of these damned Jew lists on Afd I can't remember. My brain hurts a lot. Please tell me what I must do StabRuler... -- JJay 05:40, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
You voted keep on a list that already exists: See Category:Lists of Jewish Americans. The point of this afd is that this main page should be deleted and used as an index to the smaller lists. That's all. StabRule 06:26, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I voted keep on a list that already exists? How silly of me. Why did you nom for deletion if it already exists? Think about what you are doing please Stabieruler. If it didn't exist, I would vote delete. But it does exist, so it must be kept. Pleaaase only nom articles that don't exist. I thought we agreed on that-- JJay 16:31, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
comment Any reason this VFD isn't listed on any of the AFD pages? Peyna 05:46, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
No idea. It should be. StabRule 06:26, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
If we Delete content and Link to Smaller Pages, we must make sure that all of the content on List of Jewish Americans are on the respective specific pages. It is possible and likely that many users have worked on the former and may have not copied the entries onto the latter.
In that case, we'll move these portion into the specified smaller lists. StabRule 19:35, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong keep. Wikipedia has many lists of people by nationality and religious/ethnic heritage. The rationale for nominating this article appears to be that the list is well maintained, which is a nonsensical basis for nomination. Durova 09:18, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
No the rationale for this nomination is ANOTHER LIST ALREADY EXISTS. I don't see why this is so difficult for everyone to understand. StabRule 19:34, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
      • StabRule has left me a message on my talk page. The existence of separate related subordinate lists may be reason to edit but is not a grounds for deletion. The precedent is well established throughout Wikipedia's religious and ethnic lists. Durova 19:53, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
        • Exactly, this whole thing has been an utter waste of time. If User:StabRule wanted to use the main list as an index why didn't they just post a message on the talkpages in a polite way andsuggest that, instead of acting in the incredibly arrogant dishonest way that can be seen by their previous edits. Arniep 21:15, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
What exactly is arrogant and dishonest about this? Absolutely nothing. You just take these lists too personally as clearly illustrated in your WP:POINT frenzy. By voting delete on this page you're saying you want to have this page cleared and made into an index - which we all CLEARLY stated above. If I was to go and clear this page myself and make it into an index I would be met with massive controversy. That is exactly why I had an AFD put up - because this way we can actually come to a consensus that this list will be made into an index. By voting strong keep, you're making it seem as if you want to keep the material in this list ------- which makes no sense.StabRule 21:44, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
No, you didn't even have to bring this problem anywhere near deletion, you just needed to make the necessary edits yourself or post a note on the talk page. And regarding the point I made it was not because I care about these lists specifically, it is because I care about fairness and equal arguments being applied to all lists. Arniep 22:18, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep LazarKr 12:36, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Violation of WP:V and WP:NOR. SlimVirgin (talk) 19:52, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • comment The people included in these lists are mentioned as being Jewish or having a Jewish forebear in published material, therefore they do not violate either WP:V and WP:NOR. Arniep 21:20, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and reform into an index. Antidote 21:34, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep but merge with the categorical lists and make this article link to those lists. Peyna 22:35, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep due to suspected sockpuppetry of StabRule, nom and others. (See my comment here) Peyna 00:49, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I already mentioned the only IP I have used because I was expecting accusations like the one above. StabRule 01:15, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Based upon the huge mess this created and actions taken by the person that listed all of these lists (spamming for votes, juvenile responses here and on talk pages); I think the best course of action is to keep everything and then sort it out on those actual pages in the discussion pages. Changing a page into an index is not something that belongs on AFD. This whole mess could have been taken care of on the talk page for List of Jewish Americans. If that didn't work, then arbitration or something would be appropriate, but AFD is not where any of this discussion belongs. Peyna 22:40, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
You can go ahead and throw immature insults at me; that's fine I'll take them -- but you and I both know that clearing a list of this size IS a big deal to people and an afd IS the best place to have a consensus. Discussion pages are often ignored and I guarantee nobody who monitors this list would agree to the deletion of this page and transformation of it into an index. StabRule 23:17, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Well again, you are wrong. I would have agreed if you had posted a message on the talk page, but you didn't do that. Arniep 23:31, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Why do I seriously doubt that. StabRule 23:46, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Because you make false assumptions? Arniep 23:50, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is that you unilateral went straight for AfD instead of bringing it up on the talk page. Wikipedia is not a democracy, and we don't just go around calling a vote on every issue. AfD is not for votes on this type of change, it is for deleting a page and to have it never to be created again. There are a lot of other actions that could and should be taken first. Peyna 00:50, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know what is so hard to grasp. My original intention was the delete the smaller lists for they are excess - someone suggested to delete the bigger list. Therefore, I agreed. Here we are. If you wish to use this list as an index later. FINE BY ME. The overall point is that one of the lists need to go. That's all. StabRule 01:39, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is not a democracy, and, in general, voting is evil (and stupid). Decisions should be made by consensus decision making rather than a strict majority rule. Peyna 00:50, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Consensus does not mean voting it out on AfD, it means discussing what should take place on the talk page, then coming to a consensus on it. That could include some sort of compromise, but does not involve voting. I would prefer if someone speedy kept all of these AfDs and then it can be discussed on the talk pages first. If that does not get anywhere, then there can be a formal survey or vote. Peyna 00:29, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Deleting a page DOES NOT mean it can never be remade. This was and still is the best course of action - to hold and afd. If these are speedy kept then we can continue the discussion in the Talk Page. StabRule 01:15, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Let's keep this polite and productive. I've suggested to an administrator that Wikipedia open a discussion to establish consensus guidelines for religious/ethnic lists. Durova 23:21, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep no reason has been given for deletion. - orioneight (talk) 01:33, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep. It looks nicely refactored into pointers to reasonable sized lists. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 17:53, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: It's hard to decide whether it's more annoying to have this misuse of AfD procedures, or scurilous and gratuitious (albeit somewhat literate) backhanded accusations of anti-semitism by editors like JJay who references Martin Niemöller. On the first: if you want a page cleaned up, do that through the article talk page, or in the extreme, via RfC; AfD'ing as a euphemism for "change the content" is asinine. On the second, if you think deleting a few words from a website is the moral equivalent of murdering your family, you are in serious need of mental health intervention. Grow up! Get over it. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 17:53, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Thank you for the kind words regarding my literacy. You are free to interpret my vote anyway you see fit. The same is true concerning my mental health, or lack thereof. But do not ever accuse me of playing tennis. I do not like little yellow balls, or white shorts. If you need to resort to that type of name calling, at least have the simple decency to do it on my talk page. -- JJay 18:43, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. WP:CIVIL; WP:NPA; that goes for both of you. Peyna 19:07, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Izehar 21:11, 29 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep It looks like the page has been cleaned up a lot. HackJandy 20:50, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep if for no other reason than the length of this debate establishes notoriety. If it was useless, nobody would care enough to write all this junk. LOL. But seems meritable in itself. Zordrac 12:35, 1 December 2005 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_Jewish_Americans_(2nd_nomination)&oldid=1069646615"