Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daheshism

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 This one needs some kinf of figuring out. I think the consensus (based on policy!) seems to be to delete Daheshism, and keep/cleanup Dr. Dahesh (so I'll also redirect Daheshism to the doctor's article. Proto::type 10:09, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Daheshism

I... honestly don't know where to begin with this. The article is about a new religion by Dr. Dahesh, who appears to exist. However, both his article and this article are full of tons and tons of original research and grand claims. He appears to be real, but I can't really find any independent verifiable information on him anywhere. Google search for the religion, the person, the person without the pen name, and some books. He also has a museum, but I think there might actually be some sources for that. Wafulz 03:32, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Also nominating Dr. Dahesh on the basis of not being verifiable. --Wafulz 03:34, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete religioncruft. Danny Lilithborne 04:13, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete both per above, references to these have been removed from reincarnation. MER-C 05:10, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I seriously believe this article on Daheshism and the article on Dr. Dahesh should not be deleted, but instead should be saved, and improved with citations, footnotes..etc. The man has quite an impressive legacy in Lebanon and beyond. In NYC there is a museum that houses his art collection, (Dahesh Museum of Art), and there is also a publishing company named after him (the Daheshist Publishing Company) located in the Newsweek building on Columbus Circle, so far they've printed and published over 100 books by and about Dr. Dahesh, and they also publish a fine bilingual (Arabic-English) periodical called Dahesh Voice. That magazine has several contributors with an impressive literary backgrounds, from professors at Ivy league universities to poets and thinkers and cultural figures from around the Middle East and beyond. I personally have known Dr. Dahesh for many years, and read his inspiring books, and believe he has a message worth reading about. GibranM 19:13, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Daheshism into Dr. Dahesh. Keep and stub Dr. Dahesh - seems to be fairly notable, even though the article in its current form is 99% original research. --- RockMFR 07:04, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good point RockMFR, I tried to do that in Dr. Dahesh , and hope the page will be saved and won't be deleted. I know additional sources can be brought in, and I will work on that.. especially that I can read Dahesh's original manuscripts in his native Arabic. Thank you for your thoughtful comments.GibranM 22:11, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. NN. WMMartin 17:38, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. While possible controversial in content, the subject is certainly notable --- Skapur 23:54, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can see no immediate reason to delete this entry. I would suggest a more thorough exploration of the resources listed within the article before reaching any definitive conclusions. I am familiar with several publications listed on the bookstore website that address the existing content from several informed perspectives, including nationally recognized newspaper journals and journalists in Lebanon. Granted Wikipedia is not a proper forum to address the truth claim of principles or beliefs, there is ample evidence to suggest that the general principles and beliefs espoused by Dr. Dahesh are as listed, that a museum and several literary works exist in his name, and that there is a large documented population of individuals who claim to have witnessed events listed, irrespective of the question of personal credibility. --WillH 24:11 28 November 2006

Anything based on "personal credibility" has to be removed as original research. --Wafulz 13:48, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I understand original research as such: "Articles may not contain any unpublished arguments, ideas, data, or theories; or any unpublished analysis or synthesis of published arguments, ideas, data, or theories that serves to advance a position." There is again a large documented and published population of individuals who claim to have witnessed events listed. I understand the documentation of such claims to be the issue at stake, not the claims themselves. For example, that "Thousands of people (Daheshists, Christians, Druze, Muslims, Jews, Zoroastrians, Agnostics,etc.) claim to have witnessed many miracles performed by Dr. Dahesh" is a fact well documented, and I would encourage those interested to investigate the resources listed. Whether or not in the end one chooses to believe their testimony is not a subject of interest for the article, nor should it be. This primarily is what I intended "the question of personal credibility" to mean. Does that make any sense? --WillH 28 November 2006

I find this topic quite fascinating and would like to research it further. I would urge Wikipedia to save and merge both articles on Dr. Dahesh and Daheshism Dmmd206.

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.