Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Canadian Yeshiva & Rabbinical School


 * 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 redirect to Modern_Orthodox_Judaism. merge away Spartaz Humbug! 19:05, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Canadian Yeshiva & Rabbinical School

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No notability - in fact, apparently nonexistent Ravpapa (talk) 16:26, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

This article was written by User:Rabroy in 2011, a user with a clear conflict of interest. At the time, I questioned whether this institution really existed - it had no students and offered no classes, had no accreditation, and was not affiliated with any other Jewish institution. However, Rabroy convinced us (myself and the few other editors involved) that there was enough documentation to justify an article. However, the Wikipedia article was just about the last reference to this Yeshiva. It still has no students and offers no courses (as far as I can determine - perhaps someone will correct me), and has not been mentioned in the press, Jewish or other, since.

So it seems an open and shut case to me. Anyone think differently? --Ravpapa (talk) 16:33, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:16, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:16, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:16, 4 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete. Fails Wikipedia WP:Notability guidelines. Suttungr (talk) 18:52, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
 *  Keep  I want to make clear that I had never heard of this seminary until about 20 minutes ago.  However, notability is not temporary, Wikipedia is appropriately filled with pages on seminaries and schools of all types that existed only briefly.  I see  no evidence that this one has ceased to exist.  But it certainly caused a stir of coverage when founded, and at least thru 2013.  Another fact is that much of the coverage (in blogs, opinion columns, news articles, also visible and in edit record of page) was due to controversies within the Jewish world over the definitions of "orthodoxy"  Not unusual.   You can find similar in Christianity, Islam and Buddhism.  Ignoring the strum und drang, sources suffice to establish notability.E.M.Gregory (talk) 17:20, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment: If the feeling here is that the article should be kept, it should certainly mention the fact that the Yeshiva has never offered any courses, has never had students, is unaffiliated with any institution (Jewish or otherwise), and offers no form of certification. --Ravpapa (talk) 05:38, 8 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Merge and Redirect to Modern Orthodox Judaism per &  below.  seems to have a valid case. Check out the "external links" on the article's page: (1) This institution's website "www.cdnyeshiva.org" is now non-existent i.e "server not found" and (2) for over three years its official blog "canadianyeshiva.wordpress.com" has not had a post since January 23, 2012. Something is very wrong here! An idea that came and went maybe, a defunct institution, a fictitious "yeshiva" that is nothing of the sort. Suggest (and this is being very kind) that since this so-called "yeshiva" is, or was, on the University of Toronto's campus and offers courses in conjunction with it, that this article about an evidently defunct program be Merged and Redirected to University of Toronto where it can still "hang on to life" but as it stands now is dead in the water or just a dead letter. Thank you, IZAK (talk) 09:08, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
 * ?So, it's an institution that was founded, attracted a bit of attention, perhaps enough to qualify as an article, then folded? There are others.  This museum idea officially folded The Boston Museum.  Others,  [] seem to fade away. Certainly we can edit this seminary article to show that it no longer exists, but do we have a reliable source?   How do we handle cases where the fate of the project  is not clear?  Where there is not  confirmation that a plan or briefly extant institution has been abandoned?  This may be an example  Armenian Genocide Museum of America, and that Museum of Motherhood is probably abandoned too.  There are others Category:Proposed museums, and undoubtedly in other categories, too.E.M.Gregory (talk) 10:43, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Our point, EM, is not that this is an institution that existed and has become defunct. It is an institution that never existed. It never had any students, it never offered any courses, and it never had any accreditation. It was only hype, and it is hype that has ceased to be.
 * I just wanted to make that point clear. I have no objection to not deleting it, if there is consensus for that. But we shouldn't keep it in the belief that it was once a seminary, because it never was. --Ravpapa (talk) 13:26, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
 * And mine was that it is in a category of WP pages about plans that got enough attention to pass WP:GNG, such as The Boston Museum, although they never existed.E.M.Gregory (talk) 14:46, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I am asking how we source this? Can we find a RS to establish the extent to which it did exist (as a plan, a funding campaign, or whatever?) And a source saying that the plan to create it was abandoned?  Or do we need a tag for planned institutions that appear to no longer have backers intending to open them?E.M.Gregory (talk) 14:50, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Okay, I accept your point about plans that got enough attention. And I also understand your question about sourcing - a knotty problem, indeed. If there were students and a program, it would be pretty easy to find a source. But find a source that says there were none? I am, essentially, surmising that there are no students, based on the fact that there were none in 2012 (documented in the article), and the whole project seems to have been abandoned since then. But I certainly don't know that for a fact, and have no idea how we would go about finding a source for this (of course, we could write a letter to founder Roy Tanenbaum, but that is against the rules). Dilemma. Maybe the best thing to do is just leave it alone. --Ravpapa (talk) 16:22, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

You were right first time around, this article is evidently just "junk information" at this point. But it did get some press over three years ago, that in turn got it onto Wikipedia, where it now hangs by a bare thread. Please consider my suggestion that it be "downgraded" by means of a Merge and Redirect to University of Toronto Merge and Redirect to Modern Orthodox Judaism per &  below, with a few sentences describing what it is/was supposed to be about. That way it is still noted but not notable enough for its own article, unless someone can show why it deserves it's independent space on Wikipedia. Thanks, IZAK (talk)
 * Not a bad idea. Not a bad idea at all. EM, what say you? --Ravpapa (talk) 13:37, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I'm good with that merge.E.M.Gregory (talk) 14:56, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
 * keep and update if there are sources to update with; otherwise merge a proposed institution that never was actually implemented can be notable if there was sufficient discussion. This is true of any topic, but only if there are sufficient reliable references to show side discussion.  The article asserts that the institution gave classes, but does not asset that it actually accepted students into a rabbinical program--that would not qualify as a degree-granting institution for presumptive notability, but the question here is GNG.) The current article is not acceptable if  if not do what it promised, because it is misleading, but that is a question of updating.  DGG ( talk ) 16:32, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nakon  03:11, 11 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Merge with Modern_Orthodox_Judaism. Merging with the University of Toronto seems pretty far-fetched, since, aside from a one-sentence statement of intention, the (non)school never had anything to do with the university. On the other hand, it was a serious attempt to develop a new form of orthodoxy, so that is probably where the reference best belongs. --Ravpapa (talk) 04:09, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Merge endorsing User:Ravpapa]'s suggestion to merge into Modern_Orthodox_Judaism E.M.Gregory (talk) 13:18, 16 April 2015 (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.