Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christian groups converting Jews

Christian groups converting Jews

Inherently POV, un-encyclopedic, original research Jayjg ^(talk) 19:32, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Jayjg ^(talk) 19:32, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I don't see how this is at all encyclopedic or how it can ever really be turned into a worthwhile article. Whimemsz 19:49, May 24, 2005 (UTC)
I am unable to decide how to vote at this time. This article as it is when it was listed on vfd seems to be entirely changed from its state yesterday. Even the title is different. What happened. I saw revert to original title and content and then relist on vfd. Sirkumsize 21:10, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: This article seems to be pushing a pretty clear point of view, although it's a lot more subtle than I would have expected. I'm not sure that this collection is useful, however. Kelly Martin 21:18, May 24, 2005 (UTC)
Delete. The title before the move was alternative claims of Jew, Judaism and Israelite. Even less encyclopedic than the current one. Peter ^Isotalo 21:22, May 24, 2005 (UTC)

Keep While the article as it stands at the time of this writing is poorly written iin places, and questionably sourced, this article should be fixed, not scrapped. The tension between Judaism and Chrisinaity is an important peice of knowledge, and the attempted and actual conversion of "Jews" to Christians is large part of that. We definatly shouldn't back away just because it is contraversial. I think we should edit, rather than scrap it. --Tznkai 21:23, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Tznkai (talk · contribs)'s second edit. Jayjg ^(talk) 21:28, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I will vouch for Tznkai (talk · contribs)'s nonsockness. Kelly Martin 21:38, May 24, 2005 (UTC)

Delete. This article started as a disturbance to make a point, and has now been turned into a pointless article. Tznkai, this same subject is dealt with in many other locations, including Comparing and contrasting Judaism and Christianity, Christianity and anti-Semitism, and Jewish view of Jesus --Goodoldpolonius2 21:26, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

-Goodoldpolonius2: I don't know about that, and if it has no new information, fine, but we shouldn't be deleting it into "unencyclopedic" or POV, that would be inconsistent with the deletion policy--Tznkai 21:31, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

-Comment:Jayjg I both missed your point, and was editing under tnzkai for a while. Please explain on my talk page.--Tznkai 21:31, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The possibility that this is duplicate material is a valid reason for a merge and redirect, but I don't feel that the articles Goodoldpolonius2 cited are more natural fits, either. Also, from an unrelated conversation with User:tznkai on IRC, I can agree that, while he's a relatively new user, he's not a nonce voter on this article. Geogre 02:03, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Inherently POV. JFW | T@lk 23:05, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep- if its POV clean it up! An article on Christian groups that seek to convert Jews to Christianity is a legitimate subject for an NPOV article, unless they are specifically covered elsewhere. This article maybe POV (although I personally can't see where as it stands) - but there is nothing inherently POV about the subject. --Doc (t) 23:12, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Qualified Keep - The article requires a better title, first of all. Many Christians and Christian groups "convert" Jews and other nonChristians regularly around the world. The groups listed in the article are special because they purposefully convert Jews in particular (or are composed of ethnic Jews who have converted to Christianity) as their primary function. Secondly, the article's text takes what seems to be offense at the idea of Christians converting others, which many Christians feel is an essential component of their faith. -Acjelen 23:25, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. In serious need of cleanup. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 00:43, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep: I have a number of problems with this article. Its writing is anemic, as noted, but the title is illogical. Is this how the material will be sought? Is this an apt description of the contents? The article is fairly NPOV, but it's also fairly inaccurate. It glosses over the fact that most Jewish religious groups are not messianic. It's simply not a majority position to look for a messiah, these days. Also, while the groups listed as proselytizers of Jews are proselytizers of Jews, there is a real nightmare of potential POV addition (and that happens with a wiki), as well as defamation. I'm not at all comfortable with the article, but it's not a deletion policy violation, so far as I can see. Geogre 02:00, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Klonimus 05:34, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, POV, not encyclopaedic. Megan1967 06:32, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep, but provide external references. Very relevant and very encyclopaedic, and I don't believe it is NPOV. Internodeuser 08:37, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]