Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hannahic Covenant


 * 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. Shimeru (talk) 17:55, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Hannahic Covenant

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Original research. A google search shows that "Hannahic covenant" is a made-up phrase. In fact, the word "covenant" does not appear at all in the narrative of 1 Samuel 1-2, while googling "Hannah's covenant" yields only one source. In fact, Hannah made a vow, not a covenant. StAnselm (talk) 03:43, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. WP:OR. Phrase does not occur in GB or GS, and article contains no references to any literature -- merely scripture verses and a vague reference to "Philosopher Isaac ben Judah Abarbanel, Lisbon, 1437 – Venice, 1508." Key claims such as "Hannahic covenant is created between a Jewish Prophetess Deborah and God" have not even a scripture reference. -- Radagast3 (talk) 06:03, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

We must tread cautiosly in treating Torah discussion with clinical detachment of science discourse. The seeds of the truth never come as fully grown trees. --Aslepoy (talk) 16:50, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. WP:DEMOLISH
 * It indicates some uniqueness to the topic, even if it is unreferenced.
 * The notion of an unspoken covenant should prove interesting. In Vayeira, God visits Abraham and has an apparent discussion with him, while clearly speaking to Sarah through Abraham as an intermediary. God indicates openly that Sarah is listening and also that He hears her responses . God also grants her wish for a child, while refuting Abraham's request on behalf of Ishmael . Clearly, negotiation is between God and Sarah, yet she is not openly addressed. --Aslepoy (talk) 16:50, 19 April 2010 (UTC) — Aslepoy (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Comment. Nobody is saying is that it isn't interesting. The question is, are their scholarly sources clearly identifying the covenant. We wait a week, of course, with this AfD, but I don't think further time will bring any more sources to light. So I don't think WP:DEMOLISH applies here. Of course, in itself, the lack of the word "covenant" in the text is not an impediment to the concept being notable (the Adamic covenant has been much discussed, for example), but this subject is simply not one that has received any attention in scholarly circles. StAnselm (talk) 01:24, 20 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:41, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions.  —Radagast 3  (talk) 04:50, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:OR While this is an important part of Shoftim and understanding Nezirus Shmuel vs. Nezirus Shimshon, it is not article-worthy in and of itself, and especially under this neologistic title. Delete as NEO/OR/SYNTH violation. Avi (talk) 17:58, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete: to the extent this article describes Hannah's role in 1 Samuel, it's already adequately covered at Hannah (Bible) and Books of Samuel.  To the extent it's about anything else (including the very concept of a "Hannahic covenant"), it's pure synthesis and non-notable original theorizing.   Glenfarclas   ( talk ) 21:48, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 22:48, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete because there is no such thing. This violates WP:NOR; WP:NEO; WP:MADEUP and probably even WP:HOAX. IZAK (talk) 09:22, 23 April 2010 (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.