Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cherem (genocide)

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 delete -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 12:09, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cherem (genocide)

This article consists of a few poorly constructed and misconstrued sentences of a poorly-disguised WP:POVFORK by a user who seems intent on creating controversial POV magnets (see related: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jericho massacre). If this topic has any validity as a term it can be legitimately included as a sub-topic in the fully sourced Cherem article. Otherwise, this is starting to look like a deliberate violation of WP:DISRUPT and WP:NOT#SOAPBOX. IZAK 09:17, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for above reasons. IZAK 09:17, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletions. IZAK 09:22, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. NASCAR Fan24^{(radio me!)} 10:36, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. WP:POVFORK given the Cherem article. Best, --Shirahadasha 14:23, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
delete I would be in favor of a snowball early close. Jon513 20:18, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. This should not be deleted based on the user's motives here, this sounds like a legitimate subject. Can it be widened with sources and citations to make it look more professional? Hell Yes!! But in no way does this article contradict any policy. I definitely am for a strong keep since i see that this discussion was opened with clear intent to turn into evidence against a certain user that he is disruptive for opening this, it should not. this is a well known subject and requires its own article since mush can be written in it--יודל 22:19, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Definitely a POV fork with intent to disrupt. There's not enough information to merit a separate article anyway, not without citations. Even if citations could be found, this could be added in a much more neutral tone to the existing article at Cherem. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 22:24, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletions. --יודל 23:53, 2 October 2007 (UTC) [reply]
STRONG KEEP: Give me time and I will write this article for Wiki. I researched it for my honours thesis. The word harem in English comes from the Arabic haram meaning "forbidden". Essentially, the herem of ancient Israel was an extreme form of spiritual quarantine. Non-Yahweh worshippers were spiritually dangerous to Israel. Let me add, the Christian view of the future involves the return of Jesus and the destruction of all who do not worship him. Biblical Christianity, like Biblical Judaism are very serious beliefs. But in neither Judaism, nor Christianity are people called to take matters into their own hands, quite the opposite, even if someone does wrong to you, the Bible teaches restraint, and condemns revenge. Jesus even says "love your enemy". Jews were encouraged by the Old Testament to be hospitable to outsiders, the herem is a very specific and restricted feature of the Old Testament. In fact, God even threatens to make Israel herself herem if she rejects him.

I have literally hundreds of references on this topic from the bibliography of my thesis. I should add, the topic will be distasteful to many, is vulnerable to vandalism, and if I write it I will be accused of bias regularly, and it will not be true. I would actually appreciate a non-expert watching the page and participating in any discussion regarding such things.

It is a fascinating topic, and actually explains why "salvation" is so important in Judaism and Christianity. The blame for the genocide of herem falls fairly and squarely on the God of the Bible. And that God is perfectly happy to defend his actions. There is a lot of text in the Bible of God doing precisely that.

~~Personally, I think Wiki will run into problems if it censors articles because it cannot develop a system for handling heated but inappropriate criticism of "hot topics"~~. Alastair Haines 02:06, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge: Stupid me, I only just woke up and didn't read everything first. There is an article on Cherem already and it is passable. The genocide aspect of herem is real, important and reflects no discredit on anyone. Joshua applies it to one of the Israelite community at Jericho. Many American states have death penalties. While I support deletion of this namespace as a POV fork. I also support writing up an accurate (hence distasteful) report of the war-herem in the Bible, within the Cherem article. If such material is excluded from the Cherem article it is censorship. POV forking is discouraged to facilitate co-operation and dialogue, not so that an unstated view can be suppressed. I will personally help anyone who wishes to research and write up the war-herem, within the Cherem article. Alastair Haines 02:18, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete POV fork from known POV-pushing editor Avi 03:19, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Yossiea ^(talk) 04:45, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. --MPerel 04:58, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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.