Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jewish-Sasanian commonwealth


 * 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. There is clear consensus here that this should not exist as a stand-alone article, the only question seems to be if any of the material should be preserved as a merge or even if the title should be preserved as a redirect. Given the concerns about verifiability, a straight delete seems like the right course of action. If reliable sources can be found, that decision can certainly be revisited in the future. -- RoySmith (talk) 02:56, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Jewish-Sasanian commonwealth

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Per comments by myself and others on the talk page, this article appears to be a WP:SYNTH effort to suggest the existence of a Jewish-run autonomous province within Sassanian-occupied Palestine in the 910s.The fact that Jerusalem was conquered with Jewish help and run for a time after by the Jews is well known, but that is another animal altogether. The article's main source is The Persian conquest of Jerusalem in 614 compared with Islamic conquest of 638, which is of doubtful reliability and anyhow pretty much says the opposite (end of chapter "Conquest and Disaster at Jerusalem"), while most of the other sources are used as context fillers. The title of the article is apparently freely invented as it does not appear in any scholarly literature, and the key statement on which the entire article rests, "it appears Jews were given permission to run the region, and they did so effectively for the next five years", has been unreferenced since the article's creation. Constantine  ✍  14:22, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Merge into Jewish revolt against Heraclius - as creator of this article, my intention was to present an important chapter of Eastern Mediterranean history, but with very little and contested sources it is problematic. It is certainly notable, but Constantine rightfully asks whether sufficient sources can warrant an article on its own and some might also question the naming.GreyShark (dibra) 17:59, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment. I don't doubt your good intentions, but the sources simply don't bear out the article's subject. If we agree that the subject and its title are essentially original research, then merging is the wrong thing to do; the right thing is to excise it from Wikipedia, because it is simply wrong information. Plus we have to bear in mind Wikipedia's prominence and its use as a reliable source. Already I have seen the "Jewish-Sasanian commonwealth" crop up in amateur blogs and history websites. Besides, the relevant articles on the Jewish revolt and the siege of Jerusalem contain AFAIK all that is known on the subject, and with some pretty good sourcing too... Constantine  ✍  20:25, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. Srnec (talk) 00:37, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Middle East-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:24, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:24, 13 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Merge into Jewish revolt against Heraclius - which could do with having AD or CE added to some of its dates to make it clear that this is not about the war that ended the existnece of the Kingdom of Judah. If (as Constantine suggests there really is nothing to merge, then plain redirect.  The suggestion seems to be that there was a quasi-independent polity under Sassanian suzerainty for about 5 years.  I do not think that a state that lasted a mere 5 years deserves a substantive article, as opposed to a section in a wider one.  I doubt it was called the "Jewish-Sasanian commonwealth", but apparently we have that name going about for it.  Accordingly this is a potential search term, so that a redirect should survive.  Peterkingiron (talk) 14:51, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
 * "Jewish-Sasanian commonwealth" is not a term anybody uses. It's another unfortunate Wikipedianism that will spread, as Constantine indicated. It should be deleted, not left as a redirect. Srnec (talk) 16:08, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, N ORTH A MERICA 1000 20:13, 19 January 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, N ORTH A MERICA 1000 00:28, 27 January 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.