382:
309:. Completely understand how my points above are invalid now looking back at what I typed (got to get better versed in wiki guidelines). Regardless this article is about a topic which is commonly thought of as a inside joke, and very few people practice it seriously. Even the article itself admits this. Also the "Anecdotes" section, which takes up the majority of the article, adds little to the actually content of the page. A condensed form of this page inserted under the "Hanukkah rituals" subsection on the
537:
There is no need for any OR or SYNTH here. There is no doubt from the hundreds of reliable references available (only a few are in the article today, but that is not the criterion) that both the term and the actual practice exist, and have been in use since 1959, however deplorable this may seem to
430:
434:
460:, which is unacceptable, but all the (reliable, ie. children's books not included) references in the article are trivial. It's possible that better references could be found for what is indeed a phenomenon (some of Edison's may be good), but a lot of the "keep" arguments are really
389:
which said "For many years, some Jewish children who have longed for a
Christmas tree have been permitted by their parents to have a "Hanukkah Bush"..." It notes the pagan (not Christian) origins of the Christmas tree. A
175:
265:
about them provided it is written in a fair and factual way ...." Contrary to the nom, the article does have citations, although I haven't been able to look most of them up because they are not online.
82:
559:. This is not an actual thing in Judaism and does not really serve any religious purpose in Judaism. It is a joke related to a Christmas tree. Maybe can be merged into Christmas tree article.
136:
359:
410:
401:
398:
395:
391:
169:
486:
281:. I agree with the above, that the subject is offensive does not mean the article is offensive. Racism is offensive, but we won't go around deleting the article
77:
407:
351:
rightly observes, that is not our criterion. On the straight question, is this subject
Notable, the answer is clearly Yes. It was discussed directly in the
538:
some people. If it's any help, many
Christians feel much the same about the (pagan) 'Christmas Tree', but we aren't likely to delete that, either.
206:
Page is an offensive depiction of what is pretty much considered a joke to most people of Jewish faith. Page lacks importances and citations.
560:
228:
Just to let you know, Knowledge is not censored and the page being offensive is not considered a valid reason for deletion. There is
109:
104:
113:
585:
568:
547:
528:
500:
477:
446:
421:
394:
also notes the non-Christian origin of the
Christmas tree as a reason for Jews to allow their children a Hanukkah bush. See also
373:
339:
322:
301:
273:
244:
215:
61:
473:
17:
96:
190:
404:
157:
386:
412:. I regret very much that any readers find it offensive or don't like it, but that is not a valid deletion argument.
385:
for "Hanukkah bush" exclusive of
Knowledge, many of which cover the subject of this article. They date back to the
604:
40:
564:
364:, and has been so discussed many times since in that publication and numerous others. Keep is the only option.
270:
151:
543:
369:
147:
600:
457:
240:
233:
36:
335:
197:
57:
469:
267:
183:
539:
461:
365:
100:
253:. To quote myself from the prior AfD in 2005, "The fact that some people may be offended by the
524:
496:
318:
229:
211:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
599:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
581:
442:
417:
348:
236:
519:. There is no story here, so let's cobble together a bunch of examples to prove the point.
163:
516:
331:
53:
232:, but that only comes in if the article is written in a manner that is non-encyclopedic.
465:
347:- some people may find this a lamentable, trivial, and even offensive subject, but as
512:
298:
258:
225:
92:
67:
520:
492:
314:
207:
130:
577:
438:
413:
576:
While a joke in
Judaism, valid concept under what is and is not Jewish Culture.
310:
286:
282:
593:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
381:
A notable part of
American culture. Google News archive has
261:
does not mean that they would necessarily be offended by an
330:
accurate and well-cited article on not unnotable subject.--
431:"The Complete Idiot's Guide to Jewish History" page 110
126:
122:
118:
182:
435::Jewish-gentile couples:Trends, Challenges and hopes,
429:
There are also some results at Google Books, such as
313:
page may be a better place to serve this information.
83:
Articles for deletion/Hanukkah bush (2nd nomination)
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
607:). No further edits should be made to this page.
361:Jewish Families Puzzled by Problem of Christmas
196:
8:
487:list of Judaism-related deletion discussions
485:Note: This debate has been included in the
484:
464:arguments, which are also unacceptable. –
75:
7:
78:Articles for deletion/Hanukkah bush
74:
24:
392:1970 Evening Independent article
511:. This is a classic example of
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
529:12:00, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
501:01:10, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
478:22:27, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
447:22:38, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
422:21:57, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
374:08:39, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
340:07:10, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
323:06:53, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
302:05:41, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
274:05:24, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
245:05:01, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
216:03:44, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
586:10:58, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
569:06:41, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
548:13:16, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
355:as long ago as December 12,
224:. The article seems to pass
62:14:10, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
456:. Nominator's rationale is
624:
596:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
285:just because of that.
73:AfDs for this article:
48:The result was
503:
490:
615:
598:
491:
295:
292:
289:
201:
200:
186:
134:
116:
34:
623:
622:
618:
617:
616:
614:
613:
612:
611:
605:deletion review
594:
387:NY Times (1960)
293:
290:
287:
259:Hanukkah bushes
143:
107:
91:
88:
71:
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
621:
619:
610:
609:
589:
588:
571:
561:71.225.233.158
553:
552:
551:
550:
532:
531:
505:
504:
481:
480:
458:WP:IDONTLIKEIT
451:
450:
449:
376:
353:New York Times
342:
325:
307:Redirect/Merge
304:
276:
268:Metropolitan90
248:
234:WP:NOTCENSORED
204:
203:
140:
87:
86:
85:
80:
72:
70:
65:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
620:
608:
606:
602:
597:
591:
590:
587:
583:
579:
575:
572:
570:
566:
562:
558:
555:
554:
549:
545:
541:
540:Chiswick Chap
536:
535:
534:
533:
530:
526:
522:
518:
514:
510:
507:
506:
502:
498:
494:
488:
483:
482:
479:
475:
471:
467:
463:
459:
455:
452:
448:
444:
440:
436:
432:
428:
425:
424:
423:
419:
415:
411:
408:
405:
402:
399:
396:
393:
388:
384:
380:
377:
375:
371:
367:
366:Chiswick Chap
363:
362:
358:
354:
350:
346:
343:
341:
337:
333:
329:
326:
324:
320:
316:
312:
308:
305:
303:
300:
296:
284:
280:
277:
275:
272:
269:
264:
260:
256:
252:
249:
246:
242:
238:
235:
231:
227:
223:
220:
219:
218:
217:
213:
209:
199:
195:
192:
189:
185:
181:
177:
174:
171:
168:
165:
162:
159:
156:
153:
149:
146:
145:Find sources:
141:
138:
132:
128:
124:
120:
115:
111:
106:
102:
98:
94:
93:Hanukkah bush
90:
89:
84:
81:
79:
76:
69:
68:Hanukkah bush
66:
64:
63:
59:
55:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
595:
592:
573:
556:
508:
453:
426:
378:
360:
356:
352:
344:
327:
306:
278:
262:
254:
250:
221:
205:
193:
187:
179:
172:
166:
160:
154:
144:
49:
47:
31:
28:
462:WP:EVERYONE
383:352 results
349:Tokyogirl79
247:tokyogirl79
237:Tokyogirl79
170:free images
332:Prosfilaes
230:WP:PROFANE
54:Tom Morris
601:talk page
493:• Gene93k
466:Roscelese
437:page 86.
255:existence
37:talk page
603:or in a
474:contribs
311:Hanukkah
137:View log
39:or in a
521:Yoninah
427:Comment
315:Dfnj123
263:article
208:Dfnj123
176:WP refs
164:scholar
110:protect
105:history
578:Naraht
557:Delete
509:Delete
439:Edison
414:Edison
283:racism
271:(talk)
226:WP:GNG
148:Google
114:delete
517:SYNTH
191:JSTOR
152:books
131:views
123:watch
119:links
16:<
582:talk
574:Keep
565:talk
544:talk
525:talk
515:and
497:talk
470:talk
443:talk
433:and
418:talk
379:Keep
370:talk
357:1960
345:Keep
336:talk
328:Keep
319:talk
299:Talk
279:Keep
251:Keep
241:talk
222:Keep
212:talk
184:FENS
158:news
127:logs
101:talk
97:edit
58:talk
50:keep
454:Meh
403:,
397:,
257:of
198:TWL
135:– (
52:. —
584:)
567:)
546:)
527:)
513:OR
499:)
489:.
476:)
472:⋅
445:)
420:)
409:,
406:,
400:,
372:)
338:)
321:)
297:|
266:--
243:)
214:)
178:)
129:|
125:|
121:|
117:|
112:|
108:|
103:|
99:|
60:)
580:(
563:(
542:(
523:(
495:(
468:(
441:(
416:(
368:(
334:(
317:(
294:P
291:I
288:J
239:(
210:(
202:)
194:·
188:·
180:·
173:·
167:·
161:·
155:·
150:(
142:(
139:)
133:)
95:(
56:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.