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 no consensus. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:45, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Antisemitism in patristics[edit]

This article appears to consist entirely of original research by synthesis. All the sources cited are primary sources; there are no third-party sources that tie these together under a common theme of "anti-Semitism in patristics." Unless such sources can be found, the article should be deleted. *** Crotalus *** 19:50, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This article was proposed for deletion on July 21. The page was never edited to reflect this AFD, so perhaps it was never transcluded. I found it using categorized discussions. What should be done?Synchronism (talk) 22:46, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:51, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisting comment This was an orphaned AFD. I used the relist script to get it onto the current log. Consider this the first week of discussion. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:57, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete concur with nom. that this appears to be a case of synthesis. JJL (talk) 03:03, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Possible Keep This seems to be a genuine topic. Perhaps it is already covered in other articles on the history of Christian antisemitism. If kept it should be improved. For instance it doesn't say what "patristics" are. I honestly don't think this is a word most people would understand, and I am not uneducated. Northwestgnome (talk) 04:35, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This is an important aspect of the broader phenomenon of Christianity and antisemitism and it has been studied in detail by numerous scholars in recent years. There could be a bit more sources, but that is not a valid reason to propose a deletion. Also, the word patristics is not so complicated, it means Church Fathers. ADM (talk) 12:03, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that the article cites only primary sources. I don't see any secondary sources that discuss the subject of "anti-Semitism in patristics." We need reliable secondary sources, or else this article constitutes original research by synthesis. Are the statements quoted anti-Semitic by modern standards? Absolutely. But no matter how obvious that seems to us, we can't just make that judgment on our own. We need sources to do that for us. *** Crotalus *** 16:46, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are plenty of second-hand sources available, and it would not take long to add them. This has been a favourite topic for scholars of antisemitism in recent years. Although the concept of antisemitism did not really exist in late Antiquity, many of these controversial views would qualify as such to most modern scholars who study the past development of this phenomenon within the Christian Church.[1] ADM (talk) 19:01, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I clicked on that Google link, and the results were not promising. Most of the highest-ranking pages were self-published personal websites and/or blogs (and, unsurprisingly, Wikipedia itself was #1). There were some books that appear to match, but not all of them were on topic, and few of them discuss this specific subject in any detail. *** Crotalus *** 14:41, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – (2x edit conflict) it looks like the article is using sources to implicitly show the existence of antisemitism in patristics, which would constitute synthesis. MuZemike 19:01, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep While the article does "combine material from multiple sources", it doesn't "reach a conclusion" or "advance a position". It just gives the information. What could be more encyclopedic? Laughingyet (talk) 00:15, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It does advance a position, as described in the very first sentence of the article. It advances the position that "The phenomenon of antisemitism in patristics has been studied in detail in recent years." This position itself needs to be backed up by third-party sources. I did a Google search on that phrase and found nothing but the Wikipedia article, Wikipedia mirrors, and various search engine spam. Any legitimate material can be included under Christianity and anti-Semitism. This article serves no purpose. *** Crotalus *** 14:41, 28 July 2009 (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.