Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arabs and anti-Semitism

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was keep. &mdash;Korath (Talk) 05:44, Apr 6, 2005 (UTC)

Arabs and anti-Semitism
This page is mostly original research. Although it contains some references it fails to explain why a separate article is needed for this from the main antisemitism article. Also it does not contain any counter-claims despite the fact that it is highly contested and marked with the NPOV tag. Delete. Sirkumsize 16:10, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Valid topic, well cited. Main Anti-semitism article is already well over the recommended article size, this is a spinoff of a sub-topic.  Sour grapes nomination because editor wasn't successful in inserting his own uncited POV into the article. Jayjg (talk)  16:51, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Jayjg is being bitter.  The fact that I did or did not try to inser "POV" into the article is an irrelevant consideration.  This article has been listed as disputed POV for over a year with no consensus.  It does not have any place in an encyclopia.  Sirkumsize 16:56, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. There's a lot of anti-Semitism in the Arab world and it fuels the Arab-Israeli conflict, so this is an important topic, and the article is well-referenced. Sirkumsize put the page up for deletion on the same day this badly written, uncited edit of his was deleted. Counterclaims are good but they should be referenced and written properly. SlimVirgin (talk)  17:16, Mar 31, 2005 (UTC)
 * Spite nomination. Keep. --jpgordon&#8711;&#8710;&#8711;&#8710; 17:27, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep &mdash; main article is already very large, and this is a significant sub-topic. &mdash; RJH 17:43, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Abuse. VfD is not an instrument of revenge. Chris 19:59, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * You are correct and that is not the reason that this article is listed. It is listed because it is not NPOV and because there is no reason for the article.  Does there have to be a separate article for blacks and anti-semitism or chinese and anti-semitism?  It also ignores more or less that the arab nations have a legitimate political conflict with a mostly jewish state.  Should this not be merged with another article or be made more neutral?  It has been listed with template:npov for over a year!  Sirkumsize 20:07, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * That's strange, because it bears all the hallmarks of someone nominating an article for deletion simply because someone can't have their own way with it. Chris 20:42, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * When a wikipedia user creates a highly charged (and let's not minced words here - I pissed someone off) article about anti-semitism that he is forever banned from nominating a deserving article on the same subject for deletion? C'mon Chris, be reasonable.  Sirkumsize 20:49, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Please ignore User:Chriscf, he has been trolling VfD for weeks now making personal attacks and spamming nominations for deletion. Assuming good faith, I am sure you meant no ill will by this listing.  --GRider\talk 21:08, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Your comment is also a personal attack which fails to assume good faith on Chris's part; please model the behaviour you recommend. Jayjg (talk) 23:14, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and allow for organic growth and improvement. VfD is not cleanup.  --GRider\talk 21:08, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Its difficult for an article to grow at all in an environment where reactionary reversion happens with impunity. Not every shred of information in the encyclopia has a reference attached to it, certainly not the in the case of what has already been accepted into this encyclopia.  I think this article is at the point where anything to improve point of view should be welcome regardless of how well supported it is.  This article has been marked NPOV for too long.  Either it needs to be cleaned up or it needs to die.  Sirkumsize 21:48, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Please review Two wrongs make a right (fallacy) and Deletion policy. Jayjg (talk) 23:17, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Frequently articles are created for subtopics when those subtopics may contain too much information for the main article or don't fit well with the main article. Antisemitism in the arab world today is different than, say, historical antisemitism. It requires us to think about different sorts of questions, such as when does criticism of Israel constitute anti-semitism and these questions should prompt a longer discussion in the article. As for your complaints about the content of the article, feel free to add to the article so long as your additions aren't original research or POV as your changes of yesterday were. Furthermore, I don't see how a general "counterclaim" section is particularly encyclopedic. Certainly, specific claims of antisemitism in the Arab world may be "exagerated or manufactured" as you say, but it seems to make more sense to challenge those specific claims rather than the existence of antisemitism in the first place. I would suggest including a discussion of when criticism of Israel constitutes antisemitism (Sharansky laid out a test for this that I think is somewhere on wikipedia) GabrielF 23:16, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep.--Eliezer 00:57, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Still needs work, but definitely belongs as a separate article.  JimCollaborator &laquo;talk&raquo; 01:53, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. A major issue of our day, actually. Fire Star 02:24, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and allow for organic growth Klonimus 04:31, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep the article and keep the POV out.  &larr;Humus sapiens&larr;Talk 10:35, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. There has been an upsurge in antisemitism in Arabs especially in Europe. Moteworthy article. Capitalistroadster 11:49, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Clearly noteworthy topic, although the article needs work. Dsmdgold 00:07, Apr 3, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep major issue. &#8212; Sesel wa  06:54, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Cleanup and remove the bias POV, however, definite need for a seperate article. --Irishpunktom\talk 14:47, Apr 4, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and rewrite entirely: current article is the tailings heap of a quotation mine but the topic is valid. I'll see what I can do for it. &#8212;Charles P. (Mirv) 00:40, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.