Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shiron.net


 * 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. Ah, after a second thought, it's better to close this and continue discussion elsewhere... Tone 22:53, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Shiron.net

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

This article fails WP:WEB. There are no awards and the last ref is a blog post. The first two refs are " (3) a brief summary of the nature of the content or the publication of Internet addresses and site or " which is an exception to #1 for notability of WP:WEB because it does not provide an independant review but rather a summary. The refs also do not support the sentences they are inline with. Even the 2 year old Hebrew version of the page cites the actual website and the company that owns it. There arn't even independant refs there. TParis00ap (talk) 20:57, 28 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Weak Delete. Possibly notable, however, few neutral references, if any.  IShadowed  ✰  21:34, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Oppose Delete. it's notable in israel and hebrew websites. Mikimik (talk) 22:18, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
 * That notability is not properly supported by the refs. Right now your reason is WP:ILIKEIT.  The creator just added some more refs though so I'll look through those as well.--TParis00ap (talk) 22:57, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
 * well, now that notability IS properly supported by the refs. Tell me when to stop adding more of them. Thanks for caring. Eddau (talk) 23:03, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I reverted those changes because the refs added did not even mention the subject. If you can find refs that cover the subject, please do.  English Wikipedia does not work the same as Herbrew Wikipedia.  Our articles must be verified with reliable sources that significantly cover the subject and demonstrate it's notability.  Otherwise it is original research if you simply say the subject is notable.  Thanks.--TParis00ap (talk) 23:11, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, they do. They all do. On some of them it is even the main topic. Are you sure you read any Hebew (בְּלִי נִיקוּד)? Eddau (talk) 23:21, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I take offense at your claim here. You know nothing of the Hebrew wikipedia and its dealings, and yet you patronize and belittle it. In reality, our notability standards are significantly stricter than the English wikipedia, and we take pride in that. okedem (talk) 19:45, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Have you taken a look at the Shiron.net article on the Hebrew Wikipedia? There are no sources other than primary sources.--TParis00ap (talk) 05:32, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
 * And I can find hundreds of thousands of such source-less articles here in English Wikipedia. Don't assume what you see in a single article reflects the general standards of the entire Wikipedia. okedem (talk) 09:14, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, sorry then.--TParis00ap (talk) 12:39, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. okedem (talk) 18:21, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - what is the Hebrew for this website? The article claims 'שִירוֹ‏נֶ‏ט' but Eddau claims 'בְּלִי נִיקוּד' - clearly different characters. GiantSnowman 23:44, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
 * שִירוֹ‏נֶ‏ט means Shiro according to Google translate.--TParis00ap (talk) 23:51, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
 * בְּלִי נִיקוּד means something about Hebrew writing technique. It means that in place of שִירוֹ‏נֶ‏ט you should write שירונט. Now copy the word שירונט, get to any of the ref I put, press Ctrl+F, and look for this word.
 * The meaning of the word שִירוֹ‏נֶ‏ט is shiron (lyric book)+ net. It is read "shironet". Thank you. Eddau (talk) 00:02, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
 * The word ''ניקוד means 'Niqqud', a term in Hebrew diacritics. (The hebrew bible, for instance, is written with Niqqud. The web texts are written without one, in usual). As Eddau said, try to search the word שירונט and not שִירוֹ‏נֵ‏ט. Danny-w (talk) 00:40, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Anyhow, on the ref http://www.nrg.co.il/online/10/ART1/047/978.html, the word שירונט appears on the first line of the subtitle, in double quotes. On the ref http://www.ynet.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-3256121,00.html that word is underlined on the first line of the first paragraph. I hope you find it now. Thank you. Eddau (talk) 03:54, 29 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment. "Shiron" is the Hebrew word for "Songs". When Google Translate sees "Shiron" in Hebrew characters, it translates it to "Songs". Hence the confusion. Both references refer to the website in question. I make no comment on relevancy, etc. at this time. Singularity42 (talk) 04:31, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
 * This is probably a useful lesson about why computer translation programs should not be used when trying to look up proper nouns and titles (such as the name of a website). They treat all nouns as common nouns, and make a literal translation. Singularity42 (talk) 04:35, 29 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Oppose Delete as Miki advised, one of the 1st line web sites in the Hebrew lyrics field Damzow (talk) 05:58, 29 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Oppose Delete Important site in Israeli culture. חובבשירה (talk) 06:39, 29 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Oppose Delete The most important website for hebrew lyrics. Was founded a long time ago (don't remember exactly when, but many years), and contains a huge list of lyrics for hebrew songs of many kinds (from the 1930s till today, various styles, holidays songs, children songs, etc.). A well known source for Hebrew lyrics, with a special method of keeping the copyrights of the lyrics. טוסברהינדי (talk) 07:15, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Oppose Delete A leading site. Deror (talk) 07:39, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: The above four !votes are WP:ILIKEIT. Can you support your reasons with policy?--TParis00ap (talk) 13:56, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Come on! They did not say that they simply like the article. Eddau (talk) 14:40, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete I nominated it for Speedy Deletion in the first place, and I feel that it still doesn't meet the requirements for notability; specifically it fails WP:WEB whichever way you look at it.  The fact that it has a page on the Hebrew-language wikipedia is irrelevant - it could be notable on he.wikipedia (debatable) without being notable here.  Furthermore, it has no English language references (see Foreign_sources), making it unverifiable to a non-Hebrew reader AND bringing into doubt its notability in English (see Notability). Shem (talk) 12:09, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Maariv and Ynet are very reliable sources. Eddau (talk) 14:36, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not disputing their reliability - I'm disputing the fact that their reliability cannot be determined by an English-speaking editor. They would be relevant on the he.wikipedia article, but are not useful here.  If you can't find English-language references at all, it is a good indication of a lack of notability on en.wikipedia.  See Notability.  How would it be if I introduced a couple of Russian-language references here that stated categorically that Shiron.net was not notable? Shem (talk) 14:45, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Most of what is on this page seems to be ILIKEIT. I'm yet to hear any evidence that this foreign-language website is in any way notable on en.wikipedia.Shem (talk) 14:49, 29 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Come on! You are also blaming all Hebrew speakers as having a conflict of interest when discussing an article about Hebrew lyric site. You did not hear any evidence because you blocked your ears.Eddau (talk) 14:55, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm clearly not accusing anyone of a conflict of interest. Please assume good faith. Shem (talk) 16:16, 29 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Oppose Delete See the following google translation of an article from haaretz, January 2008 (the Hebrew original can be seen here). on the 17th paragraph you can read the sentence "Jade turned to Idan Tal, CEO of Songs, Great music site in Israel (25 thousand songs), and asked him permission to make links from the site of his poems of Jonathan Bshiront". The proper translation should be "Paz turned to Idan Tal, CEO of Shironet, Israel's largest music site (25 thousand songs), and asked his permission to make links from his site to Jonathan's poems on Shironet". (my emphasis). Further on along the text there are more references to Shironet (in some cases mistakenly translated to "Songs" or "shiront") as a major source of Hebrew song lyrics. Please show more trust to the Hebrew speakers that responded above and their credibility. Amnon s (talk) 15:25, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
 * It's not about not having faith in the Hebrew speakers. It is about verifying newly created articles.  Every article creator is going to claim notability in thier subject whether they speak Hebrew or any language.  Once Singularity stepped in, I saw the mistake of Google translations.  Also, most of the opposes have been "This is a major site" rather than "This site's notability is supported by this, that, and these things."  Although it seems Eddau has done a good job finding additional sources.--TParis00ap (talk) 05:32, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong keep - This article easily meets WP:WEB. It is discussed extensively and mentioned frequently in national newspapers in Israel. Shironet is also included in contemporary Hebrew nonfiction books.  gidonb (talk) 15:34, 29 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Weak keep. Now that I have had a chance to review all the references, I believe there is enough coverage by multiple, reliable sources to say that this website appears to be notable. However, my !vote is "weak", because I would have preferred sources that were directly about the website, rather than about a subject/event that the website is involved with. I'm sure they exist, and I would ask those familiar with the website to add those references. I would like to take this opportunity to comment on some of the comments above:
 * The fact that it is on the Hebrew Wikipedia is indeed irrelevant to this discussion. Notablity cannot be inferred from other Wikipedias. In this case, my !vote is based on the references provided, not the Hebrew Wikipedia.
 * English language references are specifically not required. As per WP:NONENG: "However, sources in other languages are acceptable where an English equivalent is not available." I would note that if this article is kept, the references section be cleaned up with footnotes that translate the relevant content into English, in order to allow verifying for English-speaking readers. However, just because that has not been done yet is not a good enough reason to delete the article. I would suggest that English translations of the article titles be used in the reference section, not the original Hebrew ones.
 * Notability is notablity. Although this is an English Wikipedia, it has articles on subjects that are not notable in English-language cultures. It is a global encyclopedia, that happens to be in the English language. If this website is notable in Israeli culture, then it is notable. Period. Singularity42 (talk) 15:36, 29 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment Looking a at the greater Wikipedia picture, coverage of the Middle East suffers from a huge bias in the direction of conflict and violence. While these are part of life in the Middle East and should never be hidden, people also live in the Middle East, listen to music, read books, follow their idols, attend events, take joy in their families, in culture, and sports, to name just a few. It would be sad if our article about this website that easily meets WP:WEB and is used by so many people every day, without any connection to the conflicts and violence, gets deleted. It would only increase our bias. gidonb (talk) 15:58, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
 * strong keep - a very well known website. The given sources in the article are sufficient to establish notability. Alexa gives good results. Broccoli (talk) 18:47, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't put to much trust into the afore mentioned Alexa results. Especially when compared to lyrics.net's results. And, as you can see, there is no Article for lyrics.net. Alexa by itself is no indication of WP:Notability. Exit2DOS • Ctrl • Alt • Del 05:25, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tone 23:02, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.

It was already proven that there are references supporting the importance of the website reported in article for people who like Hebrew lyrics. So actually, if we keep on this discussion, we discuss the notability of all the articles dealing with Israeli culture.

I am not trying to tease anyone. Let’s really discuss whether a large encyclopedia, written in the international language should have articles about the culture of a state that in many other aspects is important. Should we write here only about subjects related to Israel that have a chance to help anyone, all over the world to design posters for demonstration, to plan a holiday in the Mediterranean, and to check linguistic issues in holy scripts? Or should we try to write things that that are important to those who want to know about other cultures just out of curiosity? What kind of subjects should be covered in an encyclopedia on a language that maximum 13 million out of the 7 billion people on earth speak, but should not be mentioned, even in short, on an international encyclopedia?

And how objective is it to write so many articles about some subjects related to the Middle East and delete all other articles related to it? Will it make Wikipedia a tourist souvenir shop like website?Eddau (talk) 00:54, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
 * That discussion might be better suited for WikiProject_Israel. If you start it there and invite me, I'll be happy to participate.--TParis00ap (talk) 19:12, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, Tone had restarted it. I could do without this discussion.Eddau (talk) 19:47, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I thought it would close in favor of keeping and I agree that consensus was reached to keep. I dont see a need to relist.--v/r - TP 19:49, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I thought so too. That’s way when I found Tone disagrees with it, I had to start asking more fundamental questions, I’m trying to understand Tone’s point of view.Eddau (talk) 20:32, 6 December 2009 (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.