Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marriage in the Bible


 * 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   redirect to Marriage in the Bible (disambiguation). Tone 21:24, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Marriage in the Bible

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

article previously blanked by a single user. I don't care to keep or delete, but the debate should happen here. UtherSRG (talk) 07:02, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Christian views on marriage. I'm mischievously tempted to label this a "plot-only description of a fictional work", but more to the point it's a content fork from Christian views on marriage, plus it's light on reliable independent sources and has more than a hint of WP:OR original research going on. - DustFormsWords (talk) 07:17, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree with most of the above comment. However, it is not a content fork of Christian views on marriage. Certainly the titles of the two articles suggest that they should be on the same topic, but in fact they aren't: Christian views on marriage is on what its title says, but Marriage in the Bible, despite its title, is in fact on one editor's personal reading of Jewish views on marriage, and does not so much as touch on Christian views of marriage. It could better be viewed as a content fork of Jewish views on marriage, but I do not think that a redirect to either Christian views or Jewish views is appropriate, as "Marriage in the Bible" is not restricted to either. JamesBWatson (talk) 07:47, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm happy to accept from an expert that Jewish views on marriage is the right article for the redirect. But clearly it's a content fork from something. - DustFormsWords (talk) 07:55, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
 * The issue at stake about whether to redirect or not isn't whether the present content of the article is a content fork, but whether searching for the title should be viewed as an attempt to find the contents of another article. Since there are two different equally relevant articles I don't see that redirecting to one or the other would be a good idea. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:29, 12 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete The whole thing is WP:OR. There are references to support minor textual details and particular translations of terms (e.g. this link to support a comment about an expression translated sometimes as "marriage tent" and sometimes as "booth", and no less than four citations to support the assertion that "mishk'vei ishah" literally means "the bed(chambers) of a woman"). There are also numerous references to various verses of the bible. However, there is a striking lack of references to any sources giving the particular synthesis and commentary made from these biblical quotes. In short, the article is essentially its creator's personal research, and subsequent editing has made only very minor changes. Furthermore, the article, despite its title, is in fact on Jewish views of marriage, with the new testament not involved. The creator of the article has been banned from editing Judaism related articles (see here). We already have Jewish views on marriage. If any of the content of Marriage in the Bible is well-sourced, not original research, and worth keeping it could be moved to Jewish views on marriage, but I cannot see that any is. JamesBWatson (talk) 07:38, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Article was created by someone topic-banned from Judaism-related articles. As it stands now, it is a hideous mess of synthesis and OR. Either redirect it somewhere reasonable or delete the mess. -- Avi (talk) 08:36, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletion discussions.  —Avi (talk) 08:37, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 13:57, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Pure WP:OR, WP:POVFORK. What little material might be salvaged from this could be used in other articles. Jayjg (talk) 22:38, 12 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete WP:SYNTH-heavy essay. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 02:21, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete unsalvageable, highly POV, essentially original research, and if its from a user banned from judaism related articles, a truly bad faith attempt to evade a ban. the title may one day be a subject, until it can be rewritten entirely, maybe a redirect as appropriate. I DONT like having to ask that someones hard work to be deleted, but the work is absolutely not appropriate for WP. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 05:47, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete CONTENT but REDIRECT name to Marriage in the Bible (disambiguation) that has links to BOTH Christian views on marriage and Jewish views on marriage as a start. IZAK (talk) 08:09, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I doubt that redlink links to both of those. Shadowjams (talk) 08:11, 16 April 2010 (UTC) - Oh, I see you just created it. Shadowjams (talk) 08:12, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Now it does. It was a Solomonic solution in the making.IZAK (talk) 08:13, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm ok with that resolution. (that's a well crafted subtle joke by the way) Shadowjams (talk) 08:17, 16 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep but rewrite. There seem to be content concerns here, but the topic (Marriage in the Hebrew Bible and in the New Testament) is a notable one. A redirect to Jewish views on marriage or Christian views on marriage isn't really appropriate, since they are subtly different: they both incorporate centuries of Biblical scholarship, and extra-Biblical sources such as the Talmud and the Church Fathers. In addition, use of marriage as a metaphor (for example, as a metaphor for God's relationship with His people) is an important aspect of marriage in the Bible, but not appropriate in the articles Christian views on marriage or Jewish views on marriage. -- Radagast3 (talk) 04:52, 17 April 2010 (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.