Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Isaac Luria (organizer)


 * 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 and redirect to J Street. Randykitty (talk) 13:12, 20 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Much later: Appears what is now J Street (advocacy group) was intended target. --Doncram (talk) 01:34, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Isaac Luria (organizer)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Subject does not appear to satisfy criteria of Notability (people). Article lists only one reliable source in which subject is mentioned tangentially.  Pink Bull  17:02, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:54, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:54, 24 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete Fails GNG. At best article over-inflates his role in the founding of J-street, at worst it may just be plain out lying about how important he was.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:47, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
 * The article doesn't say anything about his role in founding of J Street any more, and it consists only of facts, no opinions, no inflation. —Anomalocaris (talk) 08:41, 28 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep He has held two significant and noteworthy nonprofit jobs. —Anomalocaris (talk) 08:41, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - the Times article quotes him and has his photo. I'd like to see more sources. Bearian (talk) 16:45, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Davey 2010 •  (talk)  01:59, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

 
 * leaning keep although merging back to J Street may be the better option. And the parenthetical description is terrible. I'm seeing sufficient notability WRT him and J Street to at least have the redirect; what I'm missing is anything biographical other than the capsule. If he were still with J Street I'd go for the redirect in a second; OTOH I don't know that his presence in these other positions is particularly notable. Mangoe (talk) 12:53, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete - The only references are (1) a non-authoritative site maintained by one of the organizations cited for notability and (2) an article that shows the subject in a picture with others, briefly quotes the subject, and then quickly discounts the subject. The latter is not an article that discusses the subject in any manner that gives rise to notability and further one article is insufficient to confer notability.--Rpclod (talk) 18:35, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete or Redirect to J Street. I usually hold up the NY Times as the canonical measure of notability, but the cited article only mentions him in passing, once each in paragraphs 17 and 18, and in both cases, only with respect to his J Street activities.  And they don't have his photo; they have a photo of four people who work at J Street, one of whom happens to be Luria.  The NY Times article is about J Street.  Luria himself has no independent notability.  -- RoySmith (talk) 13:50, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 02:50, 11 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete - he's mentioned only in passing in the NYTimes, he didn't found any of these organisations, and the page was set up by a single-purpose account. Just being quoted in the media is not enough to meet WP:GNG - there needs to be depth of coverage, and there isn't. AdventurousMe (talk) 03:23, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete per Adventurous. --Why should I have a User Name? (talk) 12:40, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep The connections between and agendas of lobbying/advocacy groups is important information, and one way of documenting those connections/agendas is through the careers of those who move between them because peoples' views and beliefs generally don't change. It would be difficult to merge the content of this article with the J Street and Groundswell group articles, though I suppose it could be done if the content were to be inserted into both articles. But better just to keep this article.  Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 16:04, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete. No extensive coverage, fails WP:GNG. CesareAngelotti (talk) 17:59, 14 August 2014 (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.