Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Leviticus 19


 * 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 speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn, strong consensus to keep has been demonstrated and article has been improved since nomination. (non-admin closure) Hog Farm (talk) 23:15, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Leviticus 19

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This chapter of Leviticus isn't notable on its own. The books of the Bible are clearly notable, but only certain chapters and verses, like Matthew 5 and John 3:16 gain coverage on their own outside of the book. This chapter doesn't seem to gain any more coverage than just any other chapter in the Bible (yes, commentaries will discuss this chapter, but if we determine that coverage in Bible commentaries demonstrates notability, we will have articles on almost every single verse of Scripture). I'd recommend a redirect to Kedoshim, where the chapter is discussed as part of the weekly Torah portion. Hog Farm (talk) 03:35, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm (talk) 03:35, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm (talk) 03:35, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bible-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm (talk) 03:35, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletion discussions. Hog Farm (talk) 03:35, 29 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment This chapter has lots of notability by itself. The article can be expanded, but Chapter 19 is a loaded chapter dealing with lots of stuff, as the Kedoshim article shows. The fact that you are pointing to Matthew or John shows a very Christian oriented viewpoint, but for Judaism, this chapter is an important chapter. Sir Joseph (talk) 03:58, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your comments. Yes, as a Christian, I do have a viewpoint bias here.  My train of reasoning, which I did not spell out in my nomination as well as I should have, is that redirecting this to the weekly Torah reading page would be more consistent with Wikipedia's treatment of most of the rest of the chapters of the Torah.  Most of the rest of the Torah chapters redirect to either the book or the applicable weekly Torah reading page, like Leviticus 20 does.  There seems to be an outline and/or a contents summary at all of the weekly Torah reading articles (or at least all of the one I looked at).  If I'm wrong about this chapter, and the coverage at Kedoshim is not sufficient, then I stand corrected. Hog Farm (talk) 04:08, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , You're welcome and that's why I didn't !vote because I'm not sure really how to proceed since the article now isn't too well sourced, but it can be since the chapter is a very important one. It is a source of lots of contemporary laws and modern day rulings and day to day activities and thoughts. Let's see if people can expand the article with proper sourcing. People have been using Leviticus 19 for sources for protests in the news with regards to contemporary politics, etc. There are lots of good stuff, I added one bit about the Golden Rule and if I have some time I'll try to add more. Just an FYI, for googling, Leviticus in Hebrew would be Vayikra, so some sources would use that as opposed to Leviticus depending on the audience. Sir Joseph (talk) 04:15, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the tip! Hog Farm (talk) 13:59, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep Delete or Redirect No need for a separate article - possible redirect to Old testament. There are many choices for a redirect. Or delete. Lightburst (talk) 04:28, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
 * If we decide to redirect, I think Kedoshim would be the best target. There's an outline of the chapter in that article, which would guide the reader to the most applicable content. Hog Farm (talk) 14:00, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 13:59, 29 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep - the chapter is notable for WikiProject Christianity because it gives the background of the Golden Rule in the New Testament. JohnThorne (talk) 16:46, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep. Given that the chapter has a role in both Judaism and Christianity, neither sort of topic will be a good redirect candidate. As for the argument that we could end up with an article on every chapter of the Bible, see WP:NOTPAPER, "Other than verifiability and the other points presented on this page, there is no practical limit to the number of topics Wikipedia can cover or the total amount of content."--Jahaza (talk) 21:13, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep over the centuries a vast literature has been written on the Bible. Here are sources with significant coverage:  buidhe 22:27, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep. I've added some information to the article which helps support the notability of this chapter. Specifically, in some synagogues, Leviticus 19 is used as one of the readings on Yom Kippur. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 05:26, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep -- There may well be a case for every chapter of the Bible being capable of having an article. Commentary on the Bible is a legitimate aspect of theological study.  It may well be there are some chapters that are rather less notable.  However this article has quite enough content to be worth keeping the article.  I have to confess that some chapters of the law code chapters of the books of Moses are not the most popular Biblical subjects for Christians.   Peterkingiron (talk) 16:05, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep'.
 * Keep - literally books have been written on this topic alone. Bearian (talk) 17:28, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep as the article has multiple reliable sources significant coverage including a bibliography listing multiple books dealing with the subject, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 21:35, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Given that this is getting to WP:SNOW territory, would you reconsider your !vote to delete/redirect so I can withdraw this and us, especially since User:Sir Joseph and User:Metropolitan90 have expanded the article since my nomination? Hog Farm (talk) 21:51, 1 February 2020 (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.