Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/YHWH Aleim

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 WP:SNOW delete; was already deleted by me previously because it appeared to be listed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/YHWH aleim, YHWH's Council of Elohim. Sandstein 17:19, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

YHWH Aleim

Article is original research; seems to be an essay. Cites no sources; fails WP:RS, WP:V. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 15:52, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - article looks like WP:OR, and shouldn't be here unless there's the addition of serious reliable sources to verify the assertions. -Toon⁰⁵ 16:39, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete An essay related to translation or a particular hebrew phrase from bible; a series of OR by the author. Mukadderat (talk) 17:37, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as original research. BradV 18:47, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect as alternative spelling of Elohim --T-rex 19:00, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, wrong: "Aleim" is a suppesed version of Elohim. YHWH is Yahweh. Mukadderat (talk) 05:57, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - per nom. Dreamspy (talk) 20:38, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This is an essay, not an encyclopedia article. Article seems to be synthesizing various fringe sources to construct an argument not found in any of them, and seems to be essentially original research. --Shirahadasha (talk) 17:29, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment It's worth noting that the article makes a number of claims that are obviously and easily refutable and couldn't be made by a legitimate reliable source. An example is the claim that "the Masoretic text resulted from Christian David Ginsburg's Massorah compilation." There are numerous Torah scrolls, Hebrew Bibles, etc. written before the 19th century that are still in existence. The fact that the text is older than Ginsburg is easily verifiable. Best, --Shirahadasha (talk) 17:37, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Comment The basic claim this article makes is that the tetragrammaton in this phrase was changed by Levite scribes to something else. Anyone who reads Hebrew will know that this is false. The written text continues to have the tetragrammaton. The customary oral pronunication substituted a different word when reading the Hebrew Bible, and English translators have tended to use the traditional spoken rather than the written words, but this custom of readers and translators in no way emended the text. The article's basic claim is simply nonsensical. Best, --Shirahadasha (talk) 02:55, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletion discussions. --Shirahadasha (talk) 03:31, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and comments above. - House of Scandal (talk) 01:33, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - the subject matter sounds real and interesting i wish somebody would just erase those claims that no source is given but the overall subject seems worth for an encyclopedia.--YY (talk) 23:04, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You can do it! ;) BradV 23:07, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DELETE -- This is a blatant content fork of articles Names of God in Judaism and Elohim, uses highly non-standard transliterations of Hebrew (such as "Aleim"[sic!] for the word more correctly transcribed "Elohim"), and refers to "capital" and "small case" letters of the Hebrew alphabet -- something which has absolutely no meaning whatsoever, since the Hebrew alphabet has no upper-case/lower-case distinction... AnonMoos (talk) 23:25, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Forked original research. Jayjg ^(talk) 05:11, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per all of the above reasons. IZAK (talk) 06:20, 9 July 2008 (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.