Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abraham Reuel

Abraham Reuel

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

It's a lovely story, but because it only appears in one reliable source, "A Treasury of Jewish Anecdotes," it quite badly fails WP:BIO and WP:GNG, I'm afraid. (Note that the article has five references: two are to the same book, two aren't about Abraham and are only cited for the effects of the Holocaust, and one is a non-RS website promoting conversion to Judaism.) Nor does searching bring up anything else.

update: Qrsdogg has one more. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 00:08, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As a side note, if the article is kept, it should be moved to Reuel Abraham as the last and first name are currently in the wrong order. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:58, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Searching on his pre-conversion name gets a lot of hits for a completely different person, a Stasi spy. ~~I'm starting to doubt that this guy exists.~~ Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 22:02, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Sourcing isn't great, but between this newspaper article and this book source I think WP:BASIC is reached, albeit not by much. Qrsdogg (talk) 23:58, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Two stories doesn't really cut it, in my opinion. It's technically "multiple," but I don't think that's really in the spirit of the notability guidelines. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 00:08, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep After Qrsdogg (thank you,Qrsdogg), found another RS, and I also found one more source (I honestly do not know, if it is RS, but the author, Marnie Winston-Macauley seems to be notable enough to have an article about her on Wikipedia), I believe this article should be speedy kept. I just added one more RS from San Francisco Chronicle --Mbz1 (talk) 00:20, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The SF Chronicle is not significant coverage and thus does not attest notability per WP:BIO or WP:GNG. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 18:14, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A) I found that in my initial search, but it's probably not a reliable source and isn't significant coverage in any case, B) thanks for calling my attention to the Macaulay article, she seems utterly non-notable, C) no speedy keep criteria apply here. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 00:39, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is so adorable. There is really only one source for this story: Rabbi Reuben Kahane, an apparently ultra-orthodox rabbi and member of the Supreme Religious Council of Israel in the 1960s. This chestnut of his, which would certainly make fine fodder for a homily ("If an ex nazi can keep all 363 precepts of Jewish law then so can you!") makes its way into the Jewish anecdotes book (whose title alone should disqualify it from being used ever as a source for facts, or as wikipedia has it "factiness") and one or two other places, all via the wire service article from the 1960s (by a defunct wire that was believed by some to be a front for the CIA in the '50s and '60s... but i digress). Has anyone ever interviewed this man? Are there historical records/the work of actual historians to back any of this up? Any evidence than anyone serious -- anywhere -- has done a proper fact check here? No. None whatsoever. Which is stunning given the material. You'd think someone would have made a biopic by now! In fact, it's such a "neat" story of villainy, toil, and redemption (all three acts -- don't even need a Hollywood script-doctor to tailor the real history) that it's likelier that it was just a part of the Rabbi's patter. What to be done? There are thousands of articles like this on Wikipedia, written by people ignorant of what the work of history requires, and reviewed by the incompetent and lazy (this one of course was on the main page as a "DYK"). Deleting it is the right thing to do, but won't address the real problem.99.120.1.227 (talk) 01:05, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:46, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:46, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:47, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:47, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I was rather skeptical of the story, especially after reading the nomination, but The Miami News article rather convinces me that this is legit and notable. The other refs probably aren't enough on thier own, but with the credibility of one good RS, they establish the bio as worthy of the GNG. It's thin, but good enough, I think. bahamut0013^words _deeds 20:53, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]