Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zargarian Synagogue


 * 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. § FreeRangeFrog croak 05:18, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Zargarian Synagogue

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:GNG Darkness Shines (talk) 08:33, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Looks like a nice place. 7dorim.com seems to have reliable editorial staff focused on documenting the history and presence of Jews in Iran. Weak keep, I would say. --Vejvančický (talk / contribs) 11:17, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep, per Vejvančický. The article is sourced and (now) Wikified, and I've added AD equivalents for the SH dates.  Unician &nabla; 12:05, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:36, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:36, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:37, 16 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:N. Aside from the Arabic source, I don't see any third-party refs online or in Google books for the synagogue or the founder. Yoninah (talk) 01:07, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * It isn't Arabic, it's Persian. Zerotalk 01:15, 16 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment. I have no objection to an article on this subject. A synagogue for 500 people is notable enough in my estimation.  However, I'm concerned about the sourcing.  The only source given seems to be some sort of religious web site.  Conformity to WP:RS is currently arguable. Zerotalk 01:15, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep (and revisit in six months) if only for the fact that this article was created a mere two days ago (June 14, 2014) and how on Earth does the nominator know that this is not notable? (unless the nominator knows something that we don't know that is a reason to shoot down this article within a day or two of its creation) and how could anyone possibly demand "instant sources"? when it's about an ancient Persian synagogue that for all we know is more notable than hundreds of other synagogue article that have been around on WP and are still taking time to improve. Obviously the creator of the article was not engaged and was not seriously contacted and this was not discussed anywhere in any real way either at the article's or anyone's talk page or at WP:TALKJUDAISM. This is where WP:DONOTDEMOLISH and WP:CHANCE should be read and re-read. Thank you, IZAK (talk) 15:38, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep, per Vejvančický and IZAK. Especially since this is an underserved topic area on Wikipedia, I see no reason to come in with a bulldozer on a promising, sourced article after only two days. &there4; ZX95 [ discuss ] 21:50, 21 June 2014 (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.