Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Lehi members


 * 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 keep. Despite some conflict about the content, there is no consensus to delete this article itself. Turning it into a redirect can be discussed at the talk page if needed.  So Why  07:07, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

List of Lehi members

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No reason to have a separate list article for a handful of people. The list is a duplicate of Lehi (group). -- Softlavender (talk) 01:23, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Softlavender, feel free to reference the existing discussion on User_talk:Ethanbas (which is how you stumbled upon the article) Ethanbas (talk) 01:31, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 01:47, 4 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep WP:Don't demolish the house while it's still being built. Many Lehi members went on to colorful careers. Some went into politics, on the left as well as the right. Some continued in terrorism. There isn't necessarily enough to write a full article about each notable former member, but a list is a good means of writing about them. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 03:00, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Please see WP:LISTPEOPLE. Persons without Wikipedia articles do not belong in a List article. Softlavender (talk) 03:11, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Baloney. The guideline says "A person is typically included in a list of people only if all the following requirements are met:
 * The person meets the Wikipedia notability requirement.
 * The person's membership in the list's group is established by reliable sources."
 * You can't make up your own rules and pretend they're policies or guidelines. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 03:15, 4 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Shaltiel Ben-Yair does not meet WP:GNG. He gets only a handful of Google results, , all of which are passing mentions, and all but one of those are for his participation in the 1952 bombing of the house of then Communications Minister David Pinkas, who himself doesn't even have a Wikipedia article. And beyond that, the article is merely a duplicate of Lehi (group), plus Commanders which in my opinion easily can and should be in that main article, not as a WP:CONTENTFORK. -- Softlavender (talk) 03:55, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Hebrew results are important to consider. Ethanbas (talk) 04:04, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Of which you have provided none. My Google links include Haaretz. If you think he meets WP:GNG, then WP:WTAF rather than adding someone who does not meet GNG to a List article. Softlavender (talk) 04:32, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I will note the Hebrew wiki has 68 Lehi fighters - and IMHO the Hebrew wiki tends to be more selective regarding inclusion. I'm sure there are enough of these who would pass English GNG (with Hebrew sources), but don't have an English article.Icewhiz (talk) 07:54, 4 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment: The article is currently undergoing an edit war to include persons who do not have a Wikipedia article, in contravention of WP:LISTPEOPLE. -- Softlavender (talk) 03:11, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
 * If there is such an edit war, it seems one person is warring—you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 03:15, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 03:12, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Palestine-related deletion discussions. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 03:12, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:19, 4 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment I would note that this topic may fall under discretionary sanctions as it relates to the Arab-Israeli conflict, and advise everyone here (, and ) to cool down. Power~enwiki (talk) 05:43, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Neutral - at current article state (which seems to be as a copy paste of an existing list in Lehi_(group)). There are plenty of notable Lehi fighters (both for their Lehi activity, and for their post-Lehi activity). Constructively I might add that creating a category of "Lehi fighters" (in line with the Hebrew wiki category - ) - and populating the list semi-automatically would make much more sense than the current list. If the list is improved (beyond being a copy-paste of the existing list in the Lehi entry, particularly using a category) - I will change my vote. There are enough English wiki Lehi fighters to create a list, as can be seen in Category:Lehi (group).Icewhiz (talk) 06:04, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep I'm not seeing any policy-based rationale for deletion. Joefromrandb (talk) 21:56, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Redirect to the main article. you are right about the criteria when we are talking about "a specific event" they don't have to already have a page on WP, a "specific event" is not the same as being a member of a group. There could be hundreds of members of this group or maybe thousands. It further says on the LISTPEOPLE page  "In other cases, editors choose even more stringent requirements, such as already having an article written (not just qualifying for one), or being notable specifically for reasons related to membership in this group. This is commonly used to control the size of lists that could otherwise run to hundreds or thousands of people..."
 * To be included without having their own page means that their role in the group has to be significant, simply appearing on a list IMHO is not sufficient, there would have to be coverage of acts that he carried out as a member of this group. Until the list of notable members in the article become unwieldy then the raison d'être of this article is questionable. Domdeparis (talk) 09:42, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Domdeparis, Lehi (group) and its members are famous for a single event: their role in terrorist activities aimed at driving the British and the Arabs out of Palestine during the 1940s.
 * Also, please note the phrase at the beginning of the sentence you quote: "In [some] cases, editors choose even more stringent requirements". In other words, the editors of a list may choose to be more restrictive than the guideline requires. It does not say, "Editors may nominate a list for deletion a mere days after its creation because they feel its requirements are insufficiently stringent." That's just not a valid reason for deletion. That's what the talk page is for, not AfD. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 04:04, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry but there is no way that membership of a group that lasted for 8 years can be defined as an event. An event could last for a few days or weeks I suppose but not 8 years. There is an edit war going on on this page if I understand rightly as to who should and who should not be included. I maintain that there has to be proof that the members on the page are notable enough to be included and as there are only a few that are notable as per WP:LISTPEOPLE this page should be redirected until the list on the main page becomes too long. Domdeparis (talk) 06:21, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
 * The single event claim is a poor argument. Should we delete List of people involved with the French Resistance - which lasted for far shorter? There are many lists of people involved in conflict. I have a problem with the current state of the article (which is copy-pasted from the main) - but I do agree this subject could definitely merit a list.Icewhiz (talk) 06:38, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you! You have chosen a perfect exemple of a good list of members of a group to illustrate my point! There are nearly 200 names on this list and with the exception of 5 redlinked names and one that should be created as a redirect to another article every single one of them has its own WP page either in English or French. The French resistance was not a "specific event" and as you can see there are no names that do not have their own WP page. You are comparing the 2 articles and I think you are right. Both of them cover a group of people that were members of an organisation that carried out actions over a long period of time and not during a single event. As such each person should already have an article or be notable specifically for reasons related to membership in this group. This list backs up my arguments, the French resistance medal was awarded to over 60,000 people, so all were documented members of the resistance, it would be impossible to list them all on a WP page which is why only members with their own pages are listed there and I suggest the same thing for the Lehi members and if there are only a limited number then the page for members is unnecessary for the moment. Domdeparis (talk) 08:54, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Malik has already pointed out, per actual policy, the criteria for inclusion in a list-page here. Joefromrandb (talk) 02:26, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry I don't quite understand. I was the one who quoted the criteria to explain why I !vote redirect. The criteria for inclusion in a list of people but not meeting the Wikipedia notability guidelines is essentially for those that took part in an event. What I'm saying is that this doesn't apply here because being a member of a group that existed for 8 years is not an event. Normally for this kind of group each member has to have its own page to be included or a notable role in the group prouved by sources. This is why I !vote redirect until the list of notable members becomes too long. Are you agreeing or disagreeing with me? Does this qualify as an event so the criteria for inclusion are less strict? Domdeparis (talk) 06:41, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
 * You can vote any way you want. I'm just saying your opinion of what should qualify doesn't supersede actual policy. Joefromrandb (talk) 14:12, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
 * What policy are you referring to? Domdeparis (talk) 15:08, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

-WP:COLORLESSGREENIDEASSLEEPFURIOUSLY. For real? Joefromrandb (talk) 15:27, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Yep ...seriously, if you're talking about WP:LIST it's a guideline and not policy. Try this link. WP:The difference between policies, guidelines and essays. Domdeparis (talk) 15:56, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
 * When a link appears in blue, that means it's a functioning link. No need to try it. I'm sure it works. Joefromrandb (talk) 16:24, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
 * sorry my bad I should have been more explicit, that should have read "try reading it"...so what was the "actual policy" you wanted to point me to? Domdeparis (talk) 00:44, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia policy. Joefromrandb (talk) 05:08, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Ah...and "Wikipedia policy" says what exactly to back up your statement about this discussion ? Domdeparis (talk) 06:42, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
 * It's more what it doesn't say. You're just making things up, like, "per WP:LISTPEOPLE this list should be redirected until the list on the main page becomes too long". Joefromrandb (talk) 14:48, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
 * that's quite a surreal comment about policy...anyway I never said listpeople said that. I said that was my reasoning behind voting redirect. End of comment I'll let others work it out now. Domdeparis (talk)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – XboxGamer 22408 talk 02:04, 12 June 2017 (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.