Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shabbos App (2nd nomination)

Shabbos App

AfDs for this article:

• Articles for deletion/Shabbos App
• Articles for deletion/Shabbos App (2nd nomination)
• Articles for deletion/Shabbos App (3rd nomination)

Shabbos App (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article was initially created by the creators of the purported app. Though other editors later added sources which talked about the "app" during the week in which it was the "topic de jour" on many Jewish websites, they were all predicated on the Kickstarter campaign which had been created for the potential app. Since then, the creators of the Kickstarter campaign have ended that campaign, and have in fact stated publically that they only started the campaign in the first place to gauge interest in such an app. There is no indication that the app actually exists, or ever will. While it might make sense to mention this Internet event in a section of an article on technological innovations in Orthodox Judaism, it certainly is not notable enough to have its own article on Wikipedia. - Lisa (talk - contribs) 20:48, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

• DELETE Product doesn't exist yet and the article is all based on WP:CRYSTALBALL and WP:GOSSIP - not what an encyclopedia is about. Jytdog (talk) 21:25, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 21:55, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 21:55, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletion discussions. 22:21, 21 October 2014 (UTC) IZAK (talk) 22:21, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

• Keep - The topic easily passes WP:GNG having received significant coverage in multiple reliable sources. It's inconsequential whether or not the app has been released or even if it's a hoax, as topic notability is based upon source coverage, the reliability of sources and depth of coverage. Source examples include:

Template:Multicol

• The Times of Israel
• The Times of Israel
• Haaretz

Template:Multicol-break

• Popular Mechanics
• The Jewish Week
• Orthodox Union.

Template:Multicol-end

–NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:04, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

• Keep per Northamerica1000: "It's inconsequential whether or not the app has been released or even if it's a hoax, as notability is based upon source coverage." In simple words, even if it is a hoax, it is a notable hoax. Debresser (talk) 22:10, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
• Keep because 1 the article cites sufficient WP:V & WP:RS, and adheres to WP:NPOV, to make it basically WP:N regardless if it was a trial balloon or has yet to see the light of day it has sparked serious attention and 2 because it relates to serious core issues of Shabbat-observant Orthodox young Jews who are nevertheless addicted to texting and communicating with each other on Shabbat with their smart phones hence the interest in this innovation. 3 So this is not a "hoax" nor is it a form of "crystal balling" rather it's something to be treated more in the spirit of WP:DONOTDEMOLISH and WP:CHANCE. 4 This AfD comes within days of the first AfD being closed as lacking consensus to delete, meaning there was enough of a WP:CONSENSUS to keep the article and not delete it. Therefore, one can only conclude that 5 the nominator appears very upset that his arguments and POV did not carry the day first time around and now wants to keep the arguments going, that does seem rather WP:POINTY and engaging in borderline WP:BATTLEGROUND behavior to achieve on the fly what was not achieved after almost a month that the 1st AfD lasted. 6 Note that way out Theories, even non-existent Faeries and invisible Ghosts, get their own elaborate WP articles even if they never make an appearance in the real world right away or ever. 7 The nominator is advised to read up on WP:SPIDERMAN and cool it. Thank you, IZAK (talk) 22:12, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:CRYSTAL. This is an article about a future product from a vendor with no track record. In general, we should try to not let Wikipedia be used for promotion. Deleting the article now would be appropriate. We can revisit this if and when the thing ships. It's supposed to ship on 1 DEC 2014, so we'll know then. Waiting will also resolve the "hoax" issue. This is an encyclopedia; there's no big rush. John Nagle (talk) 23:07, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
• Procedural close  The previous AfD was closed on October 19.  No reason has been given in the nomination for such a quick renomination.  Unscintillating (talk) 00:05, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
• Procedural close or Keep. Or procedural keep. Per Unscintillating -- obviously, we don't re-open AfDs days after prior AfDs close, without some new good reason. Which is absent here. And Keep per the above Keeps. Clearly meets GNG, despite the nom's suppositions and OR, which litter her edit summaries, talk page discussion, and prior AfD comments. Epeefleche (talk) 01:18, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
• Keep. This topic does not escape Wikipedia's radar. The argument to delete is an argument saying that this topic escapes Wikipedia's radar. The multitude of good quality reliable sources discussing this topic are not concerned that this product does not exist or may not ever exist. Many sources are discussing the theory of such a phone. No, this is not a scientific theory. The sources are discussing whether theoretically a few tweaks to a smartphone can render it compliant with the halacha governing Shabbos permissibility. It is a topic widely covered by good quality sources. That makes this topic compliant with Wikipedia policy which might be brought to bear on whether or not to "keep" this article. In the final analysis the sources are supporting this article. Bus stop (talk) 01:53, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
• Delete At best in a few months this page can renamed The Shabbos App Hoax. At this point there is no third party evidence that it is ever going to be real. (Zwolfp (talk) 02:23, 22 October 2014 (UTC))