Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sons of the New Testament


 * 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. A possible merge can be discussed on the article's talk page. Randykitty (talk) 18:54, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

Sons of the New Testament

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable political party, never really took off. Admittedly, I am relying on the Hebrew naming within the article but neither names give anything in the way of significant in depth coverage. Praxidicae (talk) 19:10, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete No evidence of notability beyond some brief publicity when it was launched; never contested an election as far as I can see (certainly has not contested a Knesset election). Number   5  7  19:14, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I checked. The list was submitted in the 2019 elections. gidonb (talk) 09:27, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, I've just seen it appear on the party lists page. However, I still don't believe it's notable. My preference now would be to delete or merge it to List of minor political parties in Israel. It's not realistic or useful to have perma-stubs on every minor list that's ever contested a Knesset election. Number   5  7  12:47, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I only pointed out that the information you provided is incorrect. gidonb (talk) 13:04, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2019 February 24.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 19:26, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 22:33, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 22:34, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 22:35, 24 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep Part of Israeli political history, albeit fringe. No reason to delete. Credible sources exist.--Geewhiz (talk) 06:55, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
 * All but one of the sources are from a single day on which the party was announced and there is virtually nothing since. It's clearly not notable. Number   5  7  12:42, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I see coverage throughout 2013, as well as in 2016, 2017 and 2019. Definately not all but one around one day! gidonb (talk) 13:10, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep as per Gilabrand and Number 57. Sheldybett (talk) 15:26, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I am strongly in favour of deletion. Number   5  7  07:46, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Merge reasoning per Number 57, party could be merged into the article "List of minor political parties in Israel". ShimonChai (talk) 05:58, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
 *  Delete  We see a regular flow of new and wannabe political party articles at Wikipedia. This one is pretty typical. It was founded by a non-notable citizen (actual new parties tend to be founded by notable political figures,).   The founder, Bishara Shlayan, started a twitter account a few months after announcing his new party; he has 11 followers - no indication of notability there.  The announcement  "Bishara Shlayan, an Israeli Christian Arab from Nazareth who is creating a new Arab political party, says many citizens, including Jews, are contacting him to express their support, and some of them want to donate."  However, they "fear to go public with their support, he said." Party had no followers.  It got a flurry of news coverage when it was founded.  And nothing since.  Founder appears never to have been mentioned in the press again.  party never ran a candidate.  It never existed beyond the announcement made by the man who announced that the had founded it.  We cannot even call it a defunct political party.  I oppose adding it to a list of political parties because the never was a political party.  Feel free to ping me if I have missed some evidence that this "party" existed in my searches.  I am always willing to change an iVote.E.M.Gregory (talk) 20:21, 1 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi E.M.Gregory, I believe you asked for a ping when this spans more time and actual candidates run for office. Best, gidonb (talk) 09:03, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep per election filing found by Gidonb.E.M.Gregory (talk) 18:08, 3 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep. Per available sources it passes the WP:GNG. gidonb (talk) 23:21, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Can you provide those sources? Because I've searched and found exactly 0 that satisfy notability. Praxidicae (talk) 23:25, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
 * There are excellent references already linked in the article. gidonb (talk) 23:28, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
 * The blaze is certainly not an excellent source and none of the others are in depth coverage. Praxidicae (talk) 23:38, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
 * And to add to that is a 404, is certainly not a neutral, reliable source and at best, what is said about the subject in the others are from POV pieces and not at all in depth. Praxidicae (talk) 23:51, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I have improved the sourcing. It is common that nominators argue with the references and those who disagree with the deletion, even after improvments were made. Withdrawal is less common. Not every nominator is up to this challenge... gidonb (talk) 23:55, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Why would I withdraw when my point is still valid? The sourcing is still not adequate nor does the appropriate sourcing exist. Praxidicae (talk) 23:59, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
 * In your opinion. I think it is more than sufficient. We'll see what others say. gidonb (talk) 00:02, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Need more discussion after Gidonb improved the article

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  12:32, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Examining the new, post-2013 English-language material added to page.
 * 2016 Soldiers under Threat is about Israeli Christians who enlist in the IDF and are threatened by Muslim neighbors. It cites  Amir Shalian, one of the founders of the Forum for Christian Enlistment to the IDF, co founder is the cofounder of this party, a cousin, but article doesn't support notability of this political party.
 * 2016 Jewish News Syndicate: [https://www.jns.org/christmas-reality-palestinians-use-christians-as-a-pawn-israel-protects-them/ Christmas reality: Palestinians use Christians as a pawn, Israel protects them: "Shlayan, who is attempting to establish an Israeli Christian political party called Ichud Bnei Habrit (United Allies of the Covenant),..."} This doesn't support notability of the party, still just a guy in Nazareth who is "trying".
 * Gidonb, if you could be a little more specific, perhaps pull out the exact Hebrew passages that support the notability of the party, and election filing. (And if you could ping me when you do, that would be a great courtesy.) At this point I am pretty skeptical, leaning delete.E.M.Gregory (talk) 19:24, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi E.M.Gregory.
 * While referencing the article, I have added or improved 18 references of which about half have WP:SIGCOV, add to the notability of the subject, and easily draw it over the WP:GNG line. Nomination is a WP:BEFORE failure. All 18 are good articles, in 16 out of 18 cases authors took pride in what had been written and signed themselves. The two other articles are also by highly reputable sources, Haaretz and JNS. Newspapers include important national newspapers, such as Haaretz, Yediot Aharonot, Israel HaYom, Globes, Maariv, and Jerusalem Post. In the US, references include Fox News, Christianity Today, TheBlaze. Major channels next to popular Jewish newspapers that are now mostly read online.
 * The two articles that you quote are not part of the WP:SIGCOV. That's ok. They still help understand the subject over time, as well as information in the article, and can be discussed. Specifically, the Jewish News Syndicate made on 23 December 2013 an observation that is similar to the one you made on March 1, 2019. To understand where both were right and wrong we have to understand the timeline. After the 2013 Knesset election (January 22) and for the remainder of the year Bishara Shilyan and his movement were heavily covered: they were to establish a party and building a large Jesus statue in Nazareth, while drawing attention to discrimination, intimidation, and violence against Christians in Israel by their Muslim neighbors.
 * This group organized under the name "Diglei HaBrit" (Flags of the Covenant). So what makes it into a real party? Running of course. Registration as a party in Israel is usually done before elections at the Party Registrar. Did they run? Not in the next cycle of 2015! To be fair, there were extenuating circumstances: these were rushed elections after Netanyahu had basically taken his own government down, yet your comment from March 1 and that of the JNS's journalists were to the point. Neverthless, proof is and should be in the pudding. So the next election cycle the movement did register and does run (right now!), making this a terrible time to delete the article, also in light of the WP:SIGCOV WP:RS WP:V coverage. Best, gidonb (talk) 22:34, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisting this because many of the "keep" comments are not exactly policy compliant (or even understandable).
 * Merge. I cannot really evaluate the hebrew sources with respect to reliability, but there isn't enough material for a standalone article here. A merger into List of minor political parties in Israel would be ideal; failing that, deletion would be my next preference. Vanamonde (Talk) 15:01, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Black Kite (talk) 01:00, 12 March 2019 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty (talk) 17:58, 19 March 2019 (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.