Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/From Central Park to Sinai


 * 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 Roy S. Neuberger. I did the redirect so feel free to merge anything useful Spartaz Humbug! 19:54, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

From Central Park to Sinai

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This book is not notable in it of itself. At most it should be merged into the author's page. Joe407 (talk) 08:33, 3 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Roy S. Neuberger. I was the one who brought this article down to its current version, and I don't really see much here that's worth saving. A bunch of reception stuff, maybe, but probably not. &mdash;  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 16:24, 3 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep. First, the book is QUITE notable, as noted below re "copies... given out."  The book has changed  lives for the good.  There is a Higher Judge; I don't have to defend the book. AV=Elul Ba. 'Nuff Said re the book.
 * As for the Wiki article(s): Re your "Please do not take this personally. I gave myself a good few weeks away..." on my Talk Page I too left this matter alone from before Tisha B'Av thru now, post-Nachamu "weekend." Isn't there an editor you can contact who has the skills to pull together, from all the deletions that were done to both articles, something to do this/these articles justice ??  Dad7 (talk) 19:21, 3 August 2009 (UTC)


 * From time to time Rebbetzin Esther Jungreis's Jewish Press column mentions that she's speaking somewhere and that copies of a particular book, translated into (typically Hebrew or Russian) were given out.
 * Before all of the edits, it was noted that From Central Park to Sinai was reprinted several times, edited into a post-Sept-11 re-issue, translated (Hebrew,Russian), etc. etc. Now that all of that was edited out, first you want to get rid of the book article, then perhaps the author's article?
 * I've seen your editing and you have demonstrated quite well that you probably could do what I ask above; of course no one has more than 24 hours per day, as Joe407 notes on his home page per "The big challenge with Wikipedia is not to lose yourself (or your job) in it..." Dad7 (talk) 19:21, 3 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete doesn't seem to me why this book is notable. Book's worth could probably be measured by the number of copies sold, but not the number of copies given away. All that's necessary for that is someone rich. There's no verifiable evidence on the many lives changed, except a few anecdotes. If the author is notable, then Merge, but doesn't look as if he is either. Greenleaf (talk) 14:12, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 18:11, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. Regardless of the book's notability, I will comment that it seems worth reading.  One of the reviews cited, Yaakov Feitman, is a person I know and good opinion to trust.  While I stand by my ADF nomination, I am putting this book on my to-read list. Joe407 (talk) 05:36, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * merge Not enough for a separate article, &, since the author has written other books also, the merge should be into that article. There is enough to justify one. I agree that "given away" is an indication that there would need to be very good evidence of notability.  DGG ( talk ) 23:53, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge anything useful to the authors page, leaving a redirect. Readers are better served by not having to click around finding small articles, when they can be better covered in one. Yob  Mod  15:39, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. Appears to have been reviewed by several publications that appear to be reliable, including Jerusalem Post, Publishers Weekly, and several topic-specific (but nonetheless independent) sources (The Jewish Press, The Jewish Week, The Jewish Observer). Sufficiently little content to be merged. The fact that there is rulebook support for an article on this book to be kept rather than merged or deleted demonstrates one of the problems with GNG. Bongo  matic  18:24, 17 August 2009 (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.