Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Noach (parsha)

Bill dauster's articles should not be excised. He is brilliant. And the more one studies Torah and the commentaries, the more one understands that there is no one answer. Thus there could be two articles about the same chapter. They could be different. The rabbis of old often could not agree on what a passage meant. There is no one answer and different articles would be appropriate. Let the readers have both.96.241.126.33 (talk) 11:04, 9 July 2012 (UTC) — 96.241.126.33 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

No, we can only have one article on a subject, see WP:POVFORK. Dougweller (talk) 11:25, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

The articles written by Bill Dauster are not articles on the same subject. Articles that describe what is said in a given passage in the Torah are merely descriptive. Articles that provide commentary on how a particular religious community interpret that passage are very different. To avoid confusion over what each article contains, perhaps clarification could be made at the beginning of each of Bill Dauster's articles that indicates what it contains in contrast to any other Wikipedia article. References to the other Wikipedia articles could also be included. I think a variety of articles explaining the way different religious denominations interpret each passage in the Torah would make more information available to the Wikipedia community and should be encouraged. Wheelwiz (talk) 21:01, 9 July 2012 (UTC) Wheelwiz, 5:01, 9 July 2012

Noah (parsha)

This entry and the others like it provide easy access to difficult-to-locate and hard to obtain commentaries on the Torah portion - in this case Noah. Relocating sections of the entry would reduce the enry's value. Currently it provides a comprehensive resource of traditional Jewish commentary on the Torah portion called Noah. The entry as it stands is a resource for scholars, as well as for anyone else interested in the Five Books of Moses. The entry author has presented the texts in a narrative fashion, without indicating any judgements as to their validity or importance. The entry provides a very useful tool for interested readers. MI Harrison 21:30, 10 July 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99Yards (talk • contribs)