Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jewish peoplehood

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. Black Kite 01:29, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Jewish peoplehood

Jewish peoplehood (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)

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

This article looks to me like a chunk of original research/synthesis from a particular point of view. Phrases such as "a dramatic paradigm shift in Jewish life, which is gaining increasing support within Jewish communities worldwide." sound to me that this is a position paper being positioned as a WP article. Some of the material might be better placed in an article about Mordechai Kaplan or the NADAV Foundation but this is not a WP article. Joe407 (talk) 14:36, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletion discussions. —Joe407 (talk) 14:38, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

• Delete - (pending review by a Judaica expert!) concur with the above; this looks like concept promotion cast into an article. Sources seem too "clustered" and academic; if topic were truly notable, there should be independent coverage and critique or history. There should also, by now, be better "in passing" references on the web. A Google search for "Amiut Yehudit" (with quotes) turns up exactly 2 hits at this time; the Wikipedia article in question and a casual usage in what appears to be a collections of blog comments. A search for the Hebrew term עמיות יהודית turns up a large collection of hits in Hebrew, but the first few pages of hits seem to be either low quality (blog comments, youtube comments, etc.), tied to the same cluster of sources, or to such groups as the Jewish Agency for Israel, which I think can be fairly characterized as the archetypical Zionist organization (i.e. a strong advocate for some particular positions - a group likely to take up promotion of a concept such as this). Noticeably, in the highly ranked search results I reviewed, there was only one newspaper hit, from 2006, which in passing referred to "peoplehood" as a new concept being promoted (based on the Google translation). It's certainly possible that there are better/appropriate sources that would establish notability; my inability to read Hebrew would certainly prevent me from finding them, and what we have now strikes me as inadequate for that purpose. Studerby (talk) 19:49, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
• Keep At the very least this is an expression which is being promoted. It seems from the sources that its promoters have been successful enough that it is being noticed and commented on by published sources -- hence WP notable. Of course this article does not replace others on the larger topic including Who is a Jew? and others about Jewish identity. Kitfoxxe (talk) 21:14, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
• Keep I was not certain how widely the term was in use, so I did a quicl check and found it in use as defined in the article in 14 Wikipedia articles. I have linked them all to this article. It is also clear that this has been a term of art in Jewish circles since at least the 1890's.AMuseo (talk) 00:23, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
• Keep, and encourage additional development and sourcing. The concept is far from being a neologism, and if there is renewed interest in it, an article is entirely appropriate. Hertz1888 (talk) 00:42, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
• Keep the article itself does not show the notability of this idea, and of course reads like OR, but the references indicate that it is indeed a notable phrase. i would strongly recommend a complete rewrite, but the refs are substantial.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 04:50, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
• Keep Clearly a POV fork. Jon513 (talk) 07:41, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Ummm.. Jon, did you mean to vote Keep or Delete? If you meant keep then why keep a POV fork? Joe407 (talk) 14:18, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

• Weak delete based on the following, peculiar observations:

1. This article is well sourced. At the same time, I have never heard of the term (in either English nor Hebrew). Probably some people are using it for their propaganda purposes, likely mostly outside Israel.
2. On the other hand I find it strange that neither the article about Mordecai Kaplan, nor the article about Reconstructionist Judaism which is based on his ideas, mention Jewish Peoplehood. Debresser (talk) 08:04, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

• Delete per WP:OR, WP:SYNTHESIS, and WP:NEO. The material seems to be forced into a format that yields the desired conclusions. Regarding the idea of "peoplehood," doesn't Jews take care of that by itself? Debresser: Speaking of references, did you notice that the first 6 references are dead links? Yoninah (talk) 09:27, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
• Update and comment. At the risk of outing an editor, the page creator shares a name with the NADAV Foundation's public relations director. The NADAV foundation is also the cited source for a number of the papers and refs in the article. Advancing the concept of "Jewish peoplehood" is a stated goal of the foundation "...Nadav Foundation supports initiatives designed to advance understanding of Jewish Peoplehood." While COI is not a reason to delete an article I believe that the term is currently a neologism and not in wide, notable use. This is a POVFORK looking to advance a concept rather than an article reporting on an existing concept. When Jewish peoplehood is a widespread term in the broad community (not just among those looking to advance it as a concept) it should then get an article. In the meantime, the information should be filed under Mordechai Kaplan, Jew, and if there is enough notable coverage, NADAV Foundation. Joe407 (talk) 16:07, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

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.