Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The New Song

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 delete. Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 14:33, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The New Song[edit]

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

Fails WP:Notability and WP:NOR, receives no Google hits [1], has no secondary sources. Appears to be an attempt to prove the veracity of the "petek" promoted by Rabbi Yisroel Ber Odesser and his Na Nach movement. Yoninah (talk) 15:36, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletion discussions. — Gongshow ^Talk 18:49, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No secondary sources. Merge with R' Odesser or with Na Nach Nachma. Joe407 (talk) 21:24, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Whatever, if anything, is not OR/SYNTH/thrown together haphazardly can be moved to Na Nach, but the bulk of this looks like an SYNTH essay Avi (talk) 23:32, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It could be that this article should be merged with Na Nach Nachma, but I would like to point out, that this AFD is just based on yonina's hatred? for my work, if you study the history of the Na Nach Nachma page you will see how he just deletes very good work. Also what is the claim that there are no secondary sources?! The New Song is mentioned straight up in the Bible 7 times!!!! The Zohar talks about it!!!! What better sources do you need (or do you need to see the NY times quoting the Bible in order to validitate it, God forbid?!)????!!! It seems to me that you guys are the typical example of Jews being the most anti-semetic and hateful. Avraham, What to do you meant the the article is thrown together haphazardly?! The article accurately traces the history of all the known information on the New Song, or are there sources and info that you know about that I omitted? What type of gauge of truth is Google hits????? You guys are really clutching at straws to make a case against this article, shame on you. In any event I don't think any of you really care to listen, let alone help out, as I requested, so may the Great Awesome Holy Allmerciful One God have mercy on all of us.Na Nach Nachmu Nachmun (talk) 13:06, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To Na Nach Nachmu Nachmun: Wikipedia is not the place to whine about being mistreated or to attack other editors for disagreeing with you. I have always tried to be courteous in my messages to you and to explain my reasons for everything. I think you have been remiss about reading the Wikipedia policy pages which I have quoted to you — namely, WP:Notability, WP:Reliable sources, WP:SECONDARY — and trying to conform with their guidelines. (Please click on these blue links to read and understand the policies.) As to the way you put together this article, The New Song, please read WP:SYNTH. If you want to write an essay or promote your own ideology, please do it on your own website; it doesn't belong on Wikipedia. Yoninah (talk) 14:14, 15 February 2010 (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.