Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Circumcision in ancient Egypt (rabbinic literature)

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 delete. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 05:42, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Circumcision in ancient Egypt (rabbinic literature)

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

Delete - Anything of merit should be added to Religious_male_circumcision#Ancient_Egypt. Otherwise there is nothing here worthy of its own article. Avi (talk) 02:13, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2013 January 22. Snotbot t • c » 04:09, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
keep -The anachronism presented merits the article standalone status. --Anuhek (talk) 20:40, 22 January 2013 (UTC)-[reply]
Delete as wholly unnecessary. AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 18:57, 23 January 2013 (UTC)Bold text[reply]

Delete - Unnecessary to have a separate article on this when, for the sake of coherency and continuity, it could easily be incorporated in Religious_male_circumcision#Ancient_Egypt.--Zananiri (talk) 22:11, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - one source ("Gollaher 2000 p2" must be David L. Gollaher, Circumcision: A History of the World's Most Controversial Surgery New York: Basic Books, 2000. p2 starts chapter with mention of Egypt), minimal content - not 100% certain it belongs in Religious_male_circumcision#Ancient_Egypt or in Rashi or History of male circumcision (section Circumcision in the Ancient world) but as it stands not enough to suggest separately notable. In ictu oculi (talk) 06:25, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 02:15, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 02:15, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 02:15, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Egypt-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 02:15, 24 January 2013 (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.