Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Jews in the military
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 was Delete-- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 15:29, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- List of Jews in the military (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
Seems to be far too broad a category, especially if it includes anyone of Jewish descent in any military organisation. Walton monarchist89 19:55, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Unmaintainable list of
trivialindiscriminate information. WJBscribe 23:48, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Is the list too impressive for some users prejudices? Trivial information? About Massena? Fernades de Cordoba? Prince Glinsky! User Tracadero1. 26. 07.
- Comment. Perhaps I should have said indiscriminate. The problem is not that the people within the list are trivial, but that amassing them together into a list is fairly pointless. The number of Jewish people who have served in military organisations is so vast that the list could never be complete and would need constant updating. A category would present this information much more efficiently. See WP:NOT#INFO. WJBscribe 01:35, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Please assume good faith, Tracadero. See WP:AGF. Bwithh 05:14, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Categorize - without touching if it should or should not exist, if it does exist a category would seem to be a better choice. If an editor felt strongly about red links on the list, maybe a list of requested articles? Jeepday 04:06, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Redefine much more narrowly Current list is too broadly defined - same problem if categorized. Bwithh 05:14, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Pointless and unmaintainable. This list is about as valuable as a List of New Zealanders in the military which excludes members of the New Zealand Defence Force. --Nick Dowling 09:56, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per above -Docg 12:30, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per above. --MaNeMeBasat 17:17, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Point of order: Why was the AfD notice removed from the article? -Arch dude 17:07, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, W.marsh 21:32, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- AfD notice was removed after 1.5 days by the primary editor of this article. [1] Numbers suggest a consensus to delete, but I am going to relist here just to be totally clear that this article got a fair shake. --W.marsh 21:32, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete and create a category instead as suggested above. As a list to have a list, it is unmaintainable as there have been literally millions of jews in militaries worldwide throughout history. As a category, it could be a useful portal for those who wish to see what articles wikipedia has to offer regarding some notable persons who fit the criteria. -Markeer 21:53, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Article may need sources and cleanup. However, deletion would set a precedent against all of the other lists at Lists of Jews, and that does not even begin to count the hundreds of other similar lists by ethnicity. Joshdboz 23:19, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: Absolutely vague and useless list... some might call it "listcruft", although I hate the whole cruft terminology. .V. [Talk|Email] 23:44, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment The requirement of attaining the rank of general puts this list in sharp focus and suggests renaming it. The annotations after the names of people in the list are not possible in a category, and are the reason Wikipedia has both lists (which are articles) and categories. I suggest renaming the article to better indicate the contents (and cleaning it up). Fg2 01:58, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Its not a list of every Jew in the military, its a list of those with articles, and a few with red links that deserve articles. Its a navigation page. Its no less valid than those below: --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 04:21, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- List of Jewish historians
- List of Jewish scientists and philosophers
- List of Jewish Nobel Prize winners
- List of Jewish nobility
- List of Jewish inventors
- List of Jewish jurists
- List of Jews in literature and journalism
- List of Jews in the military
- List of Jews in the performing arts
- List of Jews in politics
- List of Jews in religion
- List of Jews in the visual arts
- List of Jews in sports
- List of Black Jews
- List of fictitious Jews
- Comment. If it is what you say it is, then that is best handled by a Category: Jews. Shrumster 19:54, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment "a few with red links" somewhat underplays one issue here, since about half of the links are red (I got 64 red links out of 137 entries on an admittedly quick count). To me this speaks to the problem of article creep, where editors wish to continuously add names they subjectively feel are notable, as opposed to wishing to provide a navigation page for those wanting more information on the overall subject. To me this is a sign that a category would work better than this list -Markeer 14:05, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment A category may certainly work as well or better, but that is not in itself a reason to delete this article. Likewise, extraneous redlinks can be removed, and shouldn't affect this decision. Joshdboz 17:10, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak keep per Joshdboz, but the list is too vaguely defined as it stands. YechielMan 20:39, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - better to handle with separate categories for ethnicity and profession. Addhoc 10:53, 8 February 2007 (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.