Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lubavitch Yeshiva Network


 * 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 - Y (Y NOT?) 06:44, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Lubavitch Yeshiva Network

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

We already have Category:Chabad schools, but this sorry mess is neither a "list" nor an "article" it is just a poorly thrown together hodge-podge often with telephone numbers given (with international codes when dialing from the USA) to boot. One shudders to think what happens if this type of thing ever gets to grow on Wikipedia? Basic violation of WP:NOT; WP:NOT; WP:NOT, and it just looks like a huge WP:COI (formerly WP:VANITY) to promote one brand of Hasidic Judaism. Mercifully, no-one has thought of creating comprehensive lists (with telephone numbers and names of staff, offices and dorms, oy!) of every last school affiliated with every branch of Hasidism... Perhaps, when more decent articles about schools and yeshivas are written there can be a List of Chabad-Lubavitch yeshivas to go with Category:Chabad schools, but for now this mess must go. IZAK 08:22, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete for above reasons. IZAK 08:22, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletions.   IZAK 08:33, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. רח"ק | Talk | Contribs 20:17, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, agree violates WP:NOT --Shirahadasha 03:28, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete . Indeed, the "article" is a disaster.--Yeshivish 04:17, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
 * clearly this article has no merit and should be deleted but the topic of a "lubavitch yehsiva network" can merit inclusion in an encyclopedia. I hate it when a bad article is deleted and then a good article with the same name is speedied as "Recreation of deleted material".  The comment in the deletion should make it clear that a real article on the topic should not be deleted. Jon513 17:44, 10 April 2007 (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.