Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 01:45, 19 December 2006

This article was nominated for deletion on 13/8/2006. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

Notability

I've tagged this article as making questionable claim to notability. As one editor stated, the group currently claims a membership of less than 0.03% of Canada's Jewish population. It doesn't have CJC recognition, very little media recognition, 260 google hits. Really, organizations like Jewish Youth Against the Occupation deserve articles. They have large followings and regularly receive media coverage. This group doesn't have either. -- Chabuk 22:35, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Isn't the ACJC still seeking CJC recognition? CJCurrie 22:47, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

• They were turned down once. I'm not sure if their appeal has been heard yet. Even if they are later accepted, the CJC has hundreds of affiliated organizations, I highly doubt all of them would be deserving of an article. -- Chabuk 23:01, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Looking through the history of this article, as well as the relevant history of the several articles that link to it, it increasingly seems to me that the group's primary notability is in the apparent tenacity of its membership's pursuit of recognition by using Misplaced Pages as a platform for pontification. There are thousands of other groups, even synagogues, with astronomically more political clout than this group has, several dozen of which are in Canada. I previously characterized the group quite accurately in the article as "miniscule", which was probably overly generous of me. Not everyone bothers to do the math, and the removal of this clarification can easily result in the eggregiously mistaken impression that this group is more noteworthy than it actually is. As a result of the repeated removal, and mildly rude insinuation that the information is "inappropriate", the POV that the group really is notable is enshrined as fact. This is a direct violation of WP:NPOV#Undue weight. Further violations of Wikiphilosophy include the fact that, while Misplaced Pages certainly isn't paper, it's also not an indiscriminate collection of information. Tomer 00:17, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Readers may wish to review the afd before adding comments here. CJCurrie 00:19, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. Reading through the AFD strongly supports everything I said above. Tomer 00:22, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

• Just a note, the word "minuscule" is inherently pov which is why I removed it. I totally understand, and agree with, what you're saying Tomer, but despite the article being NN (in our opinion), it still needs to conform to Wiki policies while it's still here. -- Chabuk 00:32, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

  "Miniscule" is no more POV than "small". The group represents an insignificant/miniscule/small (in terms that are increasingly, but unjustifiably, generous) portion of the Canadian Jewish community. That's not POV, it's a statement of simple fact. POV would be if I'd also made the assertion in the article, that the group is actually irrelevant. Tomer 00:39, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

  Also, I'm not saying that the article itself is NN, rather that the group is, or at least insufficiently noteworthy to warrant an independent article. That's the crux of my view, in fact...that the most notable thing about the group (which CJCurrie in one of hir edsums describes as "cultural"--quite a stretch for a group that is clearly solely political in nature) is the article's existence! When a Misplaced Pages article is more noteworthy than the subject it covers, as is the case here, the situation needs serious review. The only way this group can possibly warrant inclusion in WP, at present, is as part of a larger discussion about fringe Jewish groups--a crucial element of which is an in-depth analysis of just how far outside the mainstream of the Jewish community they are. The best way to do this is by analyzing and scrutinizing of their expressed views and comparing those to the "mainstream", but that discourse, inasmuch as it can avoid WP:NOR, needs to take place within context--something an independent article cannot accomplish. At this juncture, the group's only claim to notability is that the CJC refuses to grant them membership. That's only a claim to notability, however, which appears to be deliberately being misrepresented as notability itself. Analogously , if ח"ו I were to go completely bonkers tomorrow and start claiming to be the queen of Transylvania, that would make me bonkers, ב"ה it wouldn't make me the queen of Transylvania. Unless the ACJC starts sponsoring hizbullah bombings of Israeli embassies, or takes up arms against the border patrol, or בס"ד moves to and declares independence for the northern half of Novaya Zemlya, they're less notable than my nephew's PTA. Meanwhile, Misplaced Pages is being used as a promotional vehicle for the group, and for the foreseeable future will continue to be, since its membership consists of excellent wikilawyers and masters of subterfuge, adept at gaming the system. This is painfully obvious in the aforementioned AfD for this article. TIA, Tomer 07:21, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

  With respect, TShilo, I believe that you may be losing a sense of perspective here. CJCurrie 20:26, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

• I'm going to have to agree with CJ about that Shilo... That being said however, it doesn't seem like we have any real notability in this subject... -- Chabuk 21:56, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

• You may address me as Tomer. I'm not losing a sense of perspective...I freely admit it was a bit sensationalist--I even called my analogy "somewhat extreme". That doesn't delegitimize what I said, nor does the response in any way address the issue... Tomer 23:47, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I wonder if the content could be merged with a different page? CJCurrie 22:33, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

• What about a adding a section to the History of the Jews in Canada article on organizations in general, giving each major organization a couple lines? -- Chabuk 23:17, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
  • That could work. Perhaps a page could also be created on left-wing Jewish activism in Canada (assuming that there isn't such a page already). CJCurrie 23:28, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

    That would be somewhat less disagreeable, but the group is already mentioned in History of the Jews in Canada, however, and the lack of mention of other groups of phenominally greater influence continues to make the ACJC appear far more important than it actually is. Making an entire section devoted to the ACJC would only exascerbate this imbalance. A far better place to cover the group, IMHO, would be in an article about Canadian Jewish politics (which should not be confused with political propensities of Canadian Jews), whither this entire article could be transposed, and expanded upon slightly, as I outlined above, covering the differences between the ACJC's views and those of groups that have significantly larger followings. The fact that this article exists, btw, and that articles on larger and more influential groups, holding to all sorts of viewpoints, especially those simplistically regarded as "right wing", is one of the greatest flaws of Misplaced Pages. Alright. Edit conflict. Chabuk, most of the above regards your suggestion. CJCurrie, your "Perhaps..." idea is one I could support much more wholeheartedly if you dropped the "also" from it. :-) The "also", IMHO, should precede the idea that an article should/could be simultaneously created to cover right-wing Jewish activism in Canada, both of which would be subpages of at least one of the two article ideas I mentioned above . Anyhoo... For right now, it's naptime! Cheers, Tomer 23:47, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

The case against deletion

I have already indicated that I believe the information in the ACJC article should be retained on Misplaced Pages in one form or another. Now, I will indicate why I believe this particular article should be kept.

Note: These comments are not made in a spirit of hostility toward any other contributor. Debate is welcome, and encouraged.

1. Misplaced Pages is founded on the principle that minority voices should receive fair representation. The ACJC are a small group in terms of membership, and it is safe to say that they do not represent a majority viewpoint in the Canadian Jewish community. Notwithstanding this, they are actively engaged in debates of concern to the community, and their views have been cited in major community publications (, ). The group is not insignificant, and the publicity they have received outside of Misplaced Pages makes them sufficiently notable for inclusion.

2. The ACJC's relationship with the broader Canadian Jewish community is a matter of significance in and of itself. The Canadian Jewish Congress's recent rejection of the ACJC's application, and the ACJC's appeal, have drawn attention to conflicting interpretations of the CJC's mandate. ACJC spokesperson Michael Mandel argues that his group has a prima facie right to affiliate with the CJC, and has stated that the CJC cannot claim to speak for Canada's Jewish community if it excludes the ACJC viewpoint. The CJC took a different position when it first rejected their application (see: Montreal Gazette, 29 October 2006, A2 or Edmonton Journal, 29 October 2006, A11), although it may reconsider when it considers the appeal. The result of this debate could have serious repercussions for other groups wishing to affiliate with the CJC in the future.

3. Misplaced Pages already has articles on organizations comparible to the ACJC, such as the Jewish Voice for Peace and Jews Against the Occupation. From the other side, we also have articles on the Jewish Defense Organization (a JDL spinoff) and Jewish Task Force, a Kahanist organization whose leader is barred from entering Israel. I cannot imagine that these groups are numerically large, or command strong community support, but this hasn't stopped us from preparing fairly detailed articles on them. (One could also mention the Jewish Motorcyclists Alliance, which may be larger than the ACJC but can hardly be described as more notable.) Precendent, in other words, favours inclusion.

CJCurrie 23:44, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Add: The ACJC was mentioned by the Canadian Arab Federation in a letter in today's Globe and Mail. CJCurrie 03:04, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

• I'm sorry, but at the most basic level, when the organization admits to having just over 100 members, and all they seem to do is write the odd press release, there is no claim to notability. They don't claim to be, nor are they, the largest (or only) Jewish organization which espouses the values which it does, and keeping them simply to hear the "minority voice" is, in my opinion, exactly the opposite of what an encyclopedia is. -- Chabuk 03:28, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

  As I've said previously, and CJCurrie has just arguedcommented so eloquently, the existence of this article violates the letter and spirit of WP:NPOV#Undue weight. Tomer 00:24, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

• The policy of "undue weight" has to do with the content of articles, not their existence. I can't find anything in the policy that would apply to this article. CJCurrie 00:43, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

  Its existence then violates only the spirit of the policy. Prominent mention of the group in History of the Jews in Canada, in the absence of mention of the group's relative irrelevance, still violates both. Tomer 01:17, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

  Its existence has nothing to do with the policy. I agree that a *prominent* reference to the ACJC on History of the Jews in Canada would be inappropriate, but a passing reference seems fine (of course, this has nothing to do with the present discussion). CJCurrie 01:45, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't see any reason to delete this, Misplaced Pages has a number of articles on groups that are smaller and less significant. It seems well sourced and since the group has been mentioned in the mainstream media I think it's valid to have an article. Hashomer 04:00, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

All of this jibberjabber about deletion is a strawman, made first by CJCurrie, and now propped up by you. My protest against the article has nothing to do with a drive to delete it. My interest is in trying to stimulate the writing of articles on the many Canadian Jewish groups, political and cultural, that are of far greater relevance to the Canadian Jewish community as well as to the world at large. Were my interest otherwise, I would never have brought up WP:BIAS. I would suggest that the two of you could be much more constructive by researching and writing about groups with whom you don't happen to agree, rather than writing longwinded argumentscomments about why this article shouldn't be deleted...especially in light of the fact that noöne involved in this discussion is arguing in favor of deletion. Cheers, Tomer 01:17, 19 December 2006 (UTC)