Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shammaite


 * 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 House of Shammai Johntex\talk 20:17, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Shammaite

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Apparent WP:HOAX. Article purports to describe a modern group described in the present tense with links to articles on 20th century events with only "source" a general quote from the New Testament that appears to require interpretation (from another source) to justify a claim that it applies to any particular group. Shirahadasha 13:26, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletions. --Shirahadasha 03:47, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I think the article is trying to describe the historical sect, but the tense makes that unclear to say the least. I think the article is salvageable if rewritten. Abstain for now. -- Bpmullins | Talk 15:25, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Wikipedia already has a House of Shammai article on the historical group. WP:POVFORK prohibits separate articles with a distinctive POV perspective and, if this article is attempting to describe the historical group, this guideline represents an alternative ground for deletion. Any reliably sourced material could be merged into an appropriate section in House of Shammai (e.g. a Christian perspective section). However, in addition to WP:V, notability needs to be established, it needs to be shown how widespread this view is within Christian circles.  --Shirahadasha 15:46, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak delete, but will change if it's independently and reliably sourced. Google searches (once you wade past the mirrors) are inconclusive; there are references to this in forums, but I can't find anything definitive to explain what it is. Probably not a hoax, but at the very least it's unverified and possibly unverifiable. Trebor 15:47, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: There's 65 hits on Google Scholar regarding this term. Just seems like a poorly-written article whose content can be addressed more clearly. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 16:01, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete I am a college-educated Jew (and I assume the nominator is also), so I feel it's okay for me to say that I've never heard of Shammaites, and I am not convinced that they exist, except in the imaginative minds of some Christians. The article is completely unsourced and must be deleted. YechielMan 21:10, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * comment probably shld be redirected to House of Shammai it's just a rarely used synonym, is distinct from historical 'zealotry'. any, sourced, info about zionist terrorists drawing inspiration from him (which sounds a bit fanciful) can be put in relevant articles. pretty sure neither hillel nor shammai are ever mentioned in christian scripture, so that's irrelevant. &rArr; bsnowball  07:50, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Redirect to House of Shammai. (And should that article be moved to School of Shammai?)  A quick skim of the Google Scholar result list that Erik found for us shows that it is being used as another term for the school/house.  Such use is in both Jewish and Christian centered publications (for example, at least six articles in The Jewish Quarterly Review, back to at least 1926).  As Gamaliel the elder, Hillel's grandson, is of the School of Hillel (see the Jewish encyclopedia link in our article), and is Paul's teacher, it is not only original research, but also false to attribute what Paul wrote to this school.  So no merge should occur.  GRBerry 18:59, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Redirect to House of Shammai, IZAK 12:02, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Redirect per GRBerry. -- Chabuk [ T • C ] 04:13, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Redirect to House of Shammai -- and yes, "house" is more correct than "school." (Bet Shammai). --Pastordavid 23:19, 1 February 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.