This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Qrsdogg (talk | contribs) at 15:14, 25 July 2011 (→Alliances in the Bible: sources). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 15:14, 25 July 2011 by Qrsdogg (talk | contribs) (→Alliances in the Bible: sources)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Alliances in the Bible
- Alliances in the Bible (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This article is essentially a list, although it doesn't call itself that. All it is is a list of various people in the Old Testament who, at one point or another, teamed up with some other people in the Old Testament.
Not a single word of it is about the concept of an alliance in the Bible; it is simply a collection of pretty arbitrary anecdotes. Therefore, despite the name, it is definitely a list, and I think that WP:INDISCRIMINATE tends to apply. ╟─TreasuryTag►condominium─╢ 08:33, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
- Delete per TreasuryTag, with the additional point that even if the article were about the actual concept, I can find no indication that the idea of alliances in the Bible is noteworthy. Yunshui (talk) 08:44, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
- Keep At the end there is a section on the importance of alliances to the ancient Jewish people. Not sure if this was added after the AfD was posted or not. Still this does seem to be a notable topic, not just a list of alliances. BigJim707 (talk) 13:12, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
- Single (and, as it happens, irrelevant) hits on gnews, gscholar and gbooks (the last two seem to be the same source). I'll grant that Google is not the universal arbiter of notability, but I've done a few in-depth and fuzzy searches using Nielsen Bookdata as well - I can't find anything that anyone's written on this topic, making it non notable per WP:GNG. Yunshui (talk) 13:19, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 20:32, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
- Weak keep. Article isn't in fantastic shape, but the source is actually the entry on "Alliances" in a Bible dictionary, so it's not an indiscriminate list of OR composed by a user. I think better, less superficial material could also be found. However, I'm open to being persuaded in the other direction. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 04:30, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:04, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
- Keep The topic has reasonable potential. See The military history of ancient Israel which presents the matter as regular military history. Warden (talk) 06:17, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
- Delete: article is based upon a (close paraphrase) single outdated (thus itself most probably a primary text) text, that itself offers little beyond a selection from the contents of the original primary source (the Bible). Unlike Colonel Warden, I would question whether Richard A. Gabriel's (biblically literalist) Old Testament-as-history account is WP:RS. The strong academic consensus appears to be that the Jews were themselves Canaanites, that Solomon's empire did not exist (and that throughout that period the Jewish kingdoms were Egyptian, and later Assyrian, vassals) so an article covering aspects of the purported 'history' of this period would need to give WP:DUE weight to such views. I'm seeing little in either Google Books or Scholar to suggest coverage on this specific topic, so would suggest that a firmer foundation be found before an article on this (or a related) topic is constructed. HrafnStalk(P) 08:02, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
- I'd support a move to something like Israelite military alliances or maybe Military alliances of the Kingdom of Israel. something a bit broader. This source has some good coverage of the topic, and this looks promising (though I don't have JSTOR access). Qrsdogg (talk) 15:14, 25 July 2011 (UTC)