Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jewish views on astrology

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. (Non-admin closure). Till 07:40, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Jewish views on astrology[edit]

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

Appears to be largely an unsourced collection of various rabbi's opinions about astrology. Doesn't look like this article can be rescued. MakeSense64 (talk) 13:23, 2 July 2012 (UTC) MakeSense64 (talk) 13:23, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Contrary to the nomination, this article is extensively sourced, and the long list of references makes it evident that this is a notable topic.--Arxiloxos (talk) 17:18, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. ((edit conflict)) The article's references include Encyclopedia Judaica, the Harvard Theological Review and Numen. It should be tagged with {{needs footnotes}}, not AfD. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 17:24, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The topic is notable, and reliable sources are readily available. The article should be improved and better referenced, not deleted. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:08, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 00:40, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Behavioural science-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 00:40, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The topic is notable and ample sources are provided, but a far better job needs to be done to associate statements in the article with their corresponding references. Alansohn (talk) 22:22, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Citing well-known sources by rabbis and WP:RS about a subject is admirable and not to be scorned the way the nominator does here. No one would scorn the fact that articles about Science cite reputable scientists or articles about Christianity cite reliable Christian scholars. This is also part of an excellent series that can be found in Category:Jewish views. IZAK (talk) 07:28, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Many sources; topic has a history centuries long. -- 202.124.73.13 (talk) 06:12, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It appears the sources need to be inlined but do exist on the page. OSborn ^arf_contribs. 19:04, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.