Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Isaac Lichtenstein
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Given how this went—only 10-9 in favor of deletion—I'm surprised this was interpreted as consensus to delete. I remain skeptical on the article, but since many of the objections were about poor sourcing, I hope this will be understoodd as a deletion without prejudice against future creation of a better-cited article. If anyone wants to see the deleted article as a possible aid to creating a more appropriate article on the subject, let me know and I will let you have a copy (as an administrator, I can access the deleted article). - Jmabel | Talk 02:22, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Surpised too. I offered WP:N
I offered it as an alternative to deletion. Unfortunately I don't think that suggestion was taken into consideration when it was deleted by a simple majority vote. Messianic Judaism editors would ask that extra consideration be given to them since they are a helpless minority in the face of such raw democratic muscle - and would ask that a decision about consensus would include the options Messianic editors promote. Granted the articles could be improved or changed to a different presentation of information, however the articles themselves in my opinion, were prematurely deleted. inigmatus 05:43, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
