Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Jewish architects

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. Sandstein 07:56, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

List of Jewish architects

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

Delete. Wikipedia is not a directory. Zloyvolsheb (talk) 18:50, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:57, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:57, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:57, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep just needs the redlinks and ELs cleaned out. OSborn^arf_contribs. 19:54, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Question Why is this different to the other 39 lists in Category:Lists of architects by nationality? Cusop Dingle (talk) 19:55, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What exactly is a "Jewish architect directory"? The nom needs to give an actual deletion rationale rather than just a WP:VAGUEWAVE before anyone should bother commenting. postdlf (talk) 22:18, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

While I agree about the inadequacy of the nominator's argument, we do not confine ourselves to them in the discussion, which is a discussion of the article, not of the nomination. Nonetheless I currently see no reason of any kind to delete. Cusop Dingle (talk) 06:31, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Pointless article. There is no rational conjunction between between being Jewish and being an architect. We might as well have List of Presbyterian architects oder List of red-haired architects. And no, Jewish is not a nationality. •••Life of Riley (T-C) 17:35, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Though it's not necessary for being Jewish and being an architect to have a rational conjunction per se (this list is just an obvious subdivision of the indexing at Category:Jews by occupation), reliable sources have also studied this conjunction of occupation and cultural/ethnic heritage, as is evident from just the first page of hits in a google book search. See particularly The Jewish Contribution to Modern Architecture, 1830 - 1930; Jewish Dimension in Modern Visual Culture, chapter 12: "Postwar Jewish Architecture and the Memory of the Holocaust;" and They Laid the Foundation: Lives and Works of German-Speaking Jewish Architects in Palestine." It would be nice if people would actually research these things instead of just assuming something has no meaning just because they are unfamiliar with it. postdlf (talk) 18:31, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Have you actually read the sources you are giving here? Your book Jewish Dimensions in Modern Visual Cutlture indeed contains only a short essay on the work of several Jewish architects guided by the memory of the Holocaust in Holocaust memorial designs since 1945. It opens, however, with this admission on pp. 285-286:

To be sure, measuring "Jewishness" in architecture – let alone defining what "Jewish architecture" itself might mean – is fraught with problems. Scholars for more than a century have struggled to identify the Jewish qualities of buildings, but they have met with very little success. As a result, the general consensus today is that a discernibly Jewish form of architecture simply does not exist.

Some other sources you might see on Google discuss Jewish architecture in the context of ancient Hebraic times or the design of synagogues, but that's not what this list is about, which merely catalogues people directory-like. Hence the inherent problem: the list we are actually discussing attempts to bring together every architect who has ever been described as Jewish, and leaves itself no more coherent than a List of Methodist architects (religious group) -- or a List of architects of Turkish descent (if you prefer a descent-based definition). Trying to put together a list of any architect who is ever been described as Jewish (by whatever definition) is what makes this list a trivial directory of people who share nothing except for two descriptions ("Jewish" and "architect") that are not generally seen as related to one another, at least in the overwhelming majority of instances.

See WP:DIRECTORY:

7. Non-encyclopedic cross-categorizations, such as "People from ethnic/cultural/religious group X employed by organization Y" or "Restaurants specializing in food type X in city Y". Cross-categories like these are not considered sufficient basis to create an article, unless the intersection of those categories is in some way a culturally significant phenomenon. See also Wikipedia:Overcategorization for this issue in categories.

Zloyvolsheb (talk) 04:33, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Except that what the sources show is that Jewish people within this particular field have been discussed and classified as such by reliable sources. It's irrelevant whether "Jewish architecture" is something distinct as this is not a "list of Jewish buildings", it's a list of notable people of the same ethnic/cultural identity who entered the same field, which reliable sources do discuss. Your equivocation of Jewish identity with anyone "of Fooian descent" or mere membership in a particular church or denomination is off the mark to say the least.

Let me put this another way. We have lists that index articles on Wikipedia, as NOTDIR itself acknowledges. One of the things that we index is articles on people of shared backgrounds and cultural identity, such as Jewish people, as do many reliable sources. And one of the ways we subdivide these indexes is by occupation, as do many reliable sources. We are not randomly indexing "Jewish people who have owned a dog and a bird but never a cat" or "architects who previously worked in fast food restaurants." We are not making up this kind of indexing ([1],[2],[3],[4]) or this particular index. So this is not an "unencyclopedic cross-categorization". postdlf (talk) 06:27, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Of course we are making up "this kind of indexing" - that is the nature of a list of people who have been described as both "Jewish" and "architects" - not necessarily "Jewish architects" (the editors themselves put one and one together to make two). A connection between the Jewishness and the architecture is not actually demonstrated. If there were a specific cultural connection relevant to the architectural work of the individuals included, I would not object to the list. Well, what is the common link between David Adler and Boris Iofan as far as architecture? If there is not any such link (as your source actually suggests), why should there be a list? If you are not aware, Jewishness typically is satisfied by descent, at least in the mainstream Jewish communities (a Jewish mother makes her irreligious child a Jew under halakha, the traditional Jewish law). That makes the present list trivial in not one, but two different ways, since 1) inclusion does not require an actual connection to Jewish religion or culture, and 2) inclusion does not require a connection to a "Jewish architecture," which, as your source actually admits, has never been defined as a concept. Zloyvolsheb (talk) 10:44, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, I'm not going to continue talking with you if you insist that "we are making up 'this kind of indexing'" after I have just given numerous links to books that do it. I'm sorry that you just don't get it. postdlf (talk) 13:47, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, satisfies WP:LISTPURP in being an index of biographical articles subdivided by occupation and ethnic/cultural/religious heritage (and complements Category:Jewish architects per WP:CLN), and satisfies the alternate standard at WP:LISTN in that the list's topic has received significant coverage from multiple reliable sources as a group as I have shown above. postdlf (talk) 18:31, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per Postdlf.--Geewhiz (talk) 09:14, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as the subject of independent works such as this book, among others, whcih shows the intersection to be defining and encyclopedic. Alansohn (talk) 22:54, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Not sure what is the issue with this list? The list totally satisfies the “Purposes of lists” including Information, Navigation & Development. Multiple books, projects cover this subject. Here is just one new example, second example, third, forth. Oleg Yunakov (talk) 05:11, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, satisfies WP:LISTPURP. To answer User:Zloyvolsheb's argument ragarding absence of a List of architects of Turkish descent it's easy to find one here. There are similar lists of Turkish American Artists, Armenian American Architects, Asian American Architects, Chinese American Artists, Russian architects, which includes those who were born in the Russian Federation/ Soviet Union/ Russian Empire/Tsardom of Russia/Grand Duchy of Moscow but later emigrated, Jewish American Architects, and so forth. --Gary4bendov (talk) 19:39, 17 April 2012 (UTC). I can't agree with User:Zloyvolsheb regarding the absence of a common link. Let's take architects Heinrich Blum from Czechoslovakia and Viktor Estrovich from Ukraine who were murdered by the Nazis. One – in the Therezien concentration camp, another one – in the infamous Kharkov's Drobitsky Yar, Ukraine. What is common between them? They both were architects of Jewish origin. There is a strong link among those people, as well as between the architects David Adler and Boris Iofan, User:Zloyvolsheb had mentioned, and who could have ended up the same way. If User:Zloyvolsheb is really interested in what is common between those people as far as architecture, he or she could educate him/herself on that subject by reading at least a book The Jewish Contribution to Modern Architecture, 1830 - 1930 by Frederic Bedoir.[reply]
As to his/her statement that the "Jewishness typically is satisfied by descent", let me refer her to a defenition of who is a Jew here--Gary4bendov (talk) 19:39, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Gary, the list of Turkish architects is fine as there is a Turkish architecture. A List of architects of Turkish descent would be a trivial list and a directory, since Turkish descent doesn't quite relate to architecture, though surely there have been many fine architects of Turkish descent or ethnicity. I think that I have shown why this is like the latter rather than the former in what I have written above. I like the architecture made by many architects who happened to be Jewish, but I don't see a case for saying that it's "Jewish architecture" and thus find no reason for us to track down every noteworthy architect who's ever been described as a Jewish by whatever source. Who is a Jew? does not reinforce your case, since one of the criteria of Jewishness there is a matrilineal descent from Jewish people. Even if every architect described as Jewish actually adhered to both Judaism and Jewish culture it would be comparable to a List of architects of Turkish heritage. Zloyvolsheb (talk) 23:00, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - I absolutely agree with User:Zloyvolsheb that the architecture made by many architects who happened to be Jewish could be noteworthy, but it doesn't make it a "Jewish architecture." Yet what we have here is a list of "Jewish architects", and not a list of "Jewish architecture" buildings. It is a list of people who happened to be architects and simultaneously of Jewish descent (genetically, religiously or culturally - doesn't matter, equally they are subjects of all sorts of anti-Semitism). And that is what makes them different from the rest of architects, and that is why it's worthy to pool their names into a special list. A list which sometimes has up to 140 visitors per day. And that is why, as noted by postdlf the "Jewish people within this particular field have been discussed and classified as such by reliable sources."
    As to the question of clarity of their Jewishness one could find answers in the respective articles.--Gary4bendov (talk) 05:51, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not clear who is or is not Jewish. TFD (talk) 01:30, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Kommentar This article is included in Category:Lists of architects by nationality. But "Jewish" is not a nationality, Israeli is a nationality. We could have an article List of Israeli architects, but this list is sorting of people based on religion. What next? List of Christian architects? List of Muslim architects? List of Buddhist architects? List of Hindu architects? --SupernovaExplosion ^Talk 00:20, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Removed that category from the article. OSborn ^arf_contribs. 00:28, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I wouldn't categorize it as a "nationality" either. But "Jewish" is a broader identity than just religion; there have been plenty of atheist Jews. As for your "what next" slippery slope comment, see WP:WAX. We don't delete articles just to prevent other articles from existing, particularly since this list actually represents a grouping that reflects many reliable sources, and it is standard to index biographies on Jewish people by occupation (what, would we have one really really really long list of Jews?). Except for Israel, I don't think Jews have ever been a majority culture or ethnic group, and they have historically been subject to targeted discrimination and segregation, and have been barred from entering certain occupations or organizations. This is part of why it is "interesting" or meaningful to consider them as a group within particular occupations (and I imagine the motive behind many of the reliable sources that do so) while it might be less interesting or meaningful for other groups. But we do have many lists of Hindus, lists of Buddhists, etc., in Category:Lists of people by belief, all of which just index our articles on people by significant biographical facts no less than the contents of Category:Lists of people by cause of death, Category:Lists of people by ethnicity, etc. postdlf (talk) 00:43, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Before the State of Israel was established in 1948, an Israeli nationality was unknown. Jews were always considered (and still are) not only as a religious group, but also as an ethnic and cultural one with a strong sense of national identity, which makes them a nationality. Is that group of people disappeared in 1948? Definitely, not. I think that the Category:Lists of architects by nationality should not be removed from the List of Jewish architects --Gary4bendov (talk) 04:05, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Spot on! A very good explanation! Oleg Yunakov (talk) 21:00, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We should not be misled by the fact that person’s national identity sometimes doesn’t correspond with his or her civil identity, like in cases of some Israeli Arabs, who identify themselves with Arab nationality. The same way as a person of Egyptian (or Tunisian, Saudi, Iraqi, etc.) nationality is also an Arab national.--Gary4bendov (talk) 04:08, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Can't we just agree on that definition?--Gary4bendov (talk) 04:18, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'd just like to point out that what categories the article is currently in are not relevant to whether or not it should be deleted. OSborn ^arf_contribs. 15:22, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. This can't be an argument for the deletion. If it is - one can remove unwanted category. So far I haven't seen one valid point why this article should be deleted other than some generic statements. The initial point that "Wikipedia is not a directory" in this case is not applicable. If it would be, then we would need to delete: List of Jewish mathematicians, List of Jewish actors, List of Jewish anarchists, List of Jewish chess players, List of Jews in politics, List of Norwegian architects and more. Since those lists are present there is no point to try and delete this list as it's not less good than the rest of the lists that I have mentioned. Oleg Yunakov (talk) 21:00, 19 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I am convinced by the argumentation of Postdlf that Jewish people, being a historically significant group for decades-long discrimination, have a special status. --SupernovaExplosion ^Talk 00:21, 20 April 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.