Talk:Golf Manor Synagogue

Please add {{WikiProject banner shell}} to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Ohio Stub‑class

	Ohio portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ohio, which collaborates on Ohio-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to current discussions.OhioWikipedia:WikiProject OhioTemplate:WikiProject OhioOhio articles
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Deleted Materials

Please explain how the accusations, gossip, and loshon hara I deleted was based on reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. If you choose not to reply and merely revert, we can take it to a third party. Thank you. Nightkey (talk) 18:44, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

These documents have come straight from the Golf Manor Synagogue Administrator via the Synagogue e-mail system to all members of the Synagogue. If you need verification, you should contact Golf Manor Synagogue's Seena Rubenstein.

http://www.golfmanorsynagogue.org/home/ContactUs/index.html

The documents are public information as they have been distributed to more than 10 people, and there was never any indication that they should be kept private. Thus, it is no longer bound to confidentiality. The constitution is not gossip. The congregant's letter is a first hand position of why the Rabbi should be kept. The Board's position is a first hand position as to an explanation o[[File:]]f their actions.

Both sides have been heard on the matter. And, this matter is important, because it shapes the course of the synagogue from a historical basis. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mgoodkat24 (talk • contribs) 20:11, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Again, these letters containing statements by a board of directors do not meet the standards for inclusion on Wikipedia: Reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. 20:43, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

I disagree with your assertion. These are primary sources that were issued by the Synagogue Administrator. They are official documents. mgoodkat24 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mgoodkat24 (talk • contribs) 21:14, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Response to third opinion request:

"Accusations, gossip, and loshon hara" was unnecessary and at least a little uncivil IMHO. But as to the subject of the dispute: Primary sources are not usually considered to be reliable sources in the context of Wikipedia. See Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources. Based on the discussion as presented here, I would not consider the mentioned documents to be able to be used as sources.—Nczempin (talk) 21:43, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Since you do not like primary sources, this whole entry is problematic, and it needs to be more compliant with Wikipedia rules. I would suggest removing most of what is on here until we can find Wikipedia acceptable/reliable sources. If it needs to be done, I can find a third-party to mediate this issue.