Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Jewish prayers and blessings

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. Sjakkalle (Check!)  09:14, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

List of Jewish prayers and blessings
Source text, no intrinsic encyclopedic value. Delete or transwikify to Wikisource. JFW | T@lk  22:52, 9 July 2005 (UTC)


 * Transwikify as sugguested by nominator -mysekurity 05:44, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. It looks like a fine collection and wikipedia would likely be the place that the less wiki-knowledgable would expect to find it. Then again, I'm among those and am perhaps mistaken regarding its proper placement... -  mnuez Edit by 208.54.14.65
 * Wikisource is equally accessible and open-source. JFW | T@lk  08:06, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Transwiki to Wikisource. Dcarrano 23:50, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Transwiki. JamesBurns 07:58, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Fabio (Recife/Brazil): I vote to keep. Any knowledge, either religious or not, any writen article shall, in my point of view, be kept open source as far as possible. Knowledge is power, and more knowledge in open source will make sure everybody has the same luck as I had as a child: to grow up with different backgrounds and to learn to respect all of them not as inferior to mine but just different views of the samething, our creator.
 * Wikisource is equally accessible and open-source. JFW | T@lk  08:06, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, of course, and edit to make it more of an an annotated list (which it is mostly already) and not a source text. Neutralitytalk 05:15, July 21, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep: possibly some of the material should be moved to Wikisource, but clearly a substantial article would remain even after that was moved. -- Jmabel | Talk 06:02, July 21, 2005 (UTC)
 * Most of the content can be merged with the relevant articles anyway. JFW | T@lk  08:06, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep per Neutrality's argument. EdwinHJ | Talk 00:39, 22 July 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.