Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Persian Jews


 * 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 of the nomination was speedy keep no cogent rationale for deletion advanced, opinions are overwhelmingly keep. - Crazy Rouge ian talk/email 23:58, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Persian Jews
Reason the page should be deleted
 * 1) Conflicting and nonextent premise: The article is conflicting by title to begin with: the article treats Jews as a race, but then claims them to be Persian (which are non-semitic) as well (e.g. being origianlly Latino and AngloSaxon simultaneoulsy). It's a false notion.
 * 2) WP:DP: Completely idiosyncratic non-topic: The article's title should read something like Jews of Iran to correspond with the article's content. The current article addresses exactly just that, not Persians of Jewry (which is an absurd thing by definition anyway).
 * 3) Political platform and POV: The entire article is a politically charged and bashing piece against Iran, providing arguments and opinions without presenting any balancing counter arguments and/or evidence. An encyclopedia should not be a political platform.
 * 4) WP:DP: Original research: Article is largely sourced on Lewis and Littman, hence not factual. All and any opposing sources have been deleted repeatedly from article. Even Jewish sources against those presented. Zereshk 22:04, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. None of these reasons are grounds for deletion; they are at best grounds for modifying or renaming the article. —Psychonaut 22:58, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep. Wrong forum to properly address the points raised.  young  american  (ahoy-hoy) 23:02, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep No compelling reason for deletion given. ~ trialsanderrors 23:06, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
 * delete. For reasons given. We need a new article in its place.--Zereshk 23:10, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep as above. Nominator disagrees with the content and the name. Debate should be about content and name, not its existence.  Flying Jazz 23:15, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
 * WP:DP actually cites original research as a sufficient reason for deletion.--Zereshk 23:24, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
 * The article cites numerous sources, plus a JSTOR article search for "Jews Persia" gives me 813 hits in relevant journals, amply enough material to present a sourced balancing viewpoint. This is a content dispute that should be resolved on the Talk page, not on AfD. ~ trialsanderrors 23:47, 10 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep the article is rife with citations, any specific instance of original research should be tagged as such, but overall the article is not original research. Many of these other concerns are legitimate, but this isn't the place to bring them. WilyD 23:35, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep good article in my opinion. Sourced reasonably well, not original research. Name change would also be something that would have to be discussed in the talk page. No reason to delete.--Jersey Devil 23:52, 10 July 2006 (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.