Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nathan Lopes Cardozo


 * 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. Proposer did not apply any policy based arguments in their nomination. General consensus is that WP:GNG is met. (non-admin closure)  ❯❯❯  Raydann  (Talk)   05:58, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Nathan Lopes Cardozo

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Not notable at all Ew3234 (talk) 22:10, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Philosophy, Judaism, Israel,  and Netherlands.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 22:50, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep Clearly notable. Entry is fine, just needs a bit of pruning and editing.--Geewhiz (talk) 08:03, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:48, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
 * A bit more than not notable/clearly notable is needed to make a decision here. We need some analysis of the sources in the article and elsewhere. Phil Bridger (talk) 11:49, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete - there is very little about him in reliable sources. Everything cited is either self-sourced, or writings by him. Bearian (talk) 14:38, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

The JC See also this article and there are so many more. I have no direct interest here, but this page should stay.
 * Comment the Cross Currents article is substantive and about him/his thought. There may well be sources in Hebrew, which I cannot access. It is possible that he can be considered a major thinker in Rabbinical thought. Lamona (talk) 17:11, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep Clearly notable. He is a prominent and well known alternative rabbinic voice who is and has published extensively, his views are reported on by news sources, for example here in:

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Shackwelllane (talk • contribs) 23:22, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep. Per sources above and the WP:GNG. Intro is bold and incorrect. gidonb (talk) 23:49, 11 February 2023 (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.