A fact from Beth Israel Congregation (Washington, Pennsylvania) appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 15 January 2011 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pennsylvania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pennsylvania on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PennsylvaniaWikipedia:WikiProject PennsylvaniaTemplate:WikiProject PennsylvaniaPennsylvania articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Judaism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Judaism-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JudaismWikipedia:WikiProject JudaismTemplate:WikiProject JudaismJudaism articles
I'm still not entirely convinced of the notability. The article looks like it is depending quite heavily on the Beth Israel website (primary source). Niteshift36 (talk) 02:47, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It's 120 years old, the oldest and only synagogue in Washington County, Pennsylvania. The article makes a number of other notability claims. I've been through many synagogue deletion processes, both proposing some should be deleted, and arguing others should not. You're free to try an AfD, but based on that experience, I think it's extremely unlikely this one would be deleted. Jayjg (talk)04:14, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm on the fence, that's why I'm DISCUSSING it. Well, at least trying to discuss it. Simply being the only one in an area or age alone don't make something notable and I think you know that. My main question, if you're done acting defensive, is what the main claim to notability is that is not from a primary source? Niteshift36 (talk) 04:22, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think my statement was defensive in any way; in any event, please don't personalize this discussion. Being the only one in an area and old actually does make it notable, as I well know, based on many previous AfD discussions regarding synagogues, and all the notability claims come from secondary sources. Jayjg (talk)04:34, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It sounded defensive to me. Granted, it is an essay, but when I look at WP:LOCAL, I start questioning how this article fares. When I look at WP:N, I don't see how age alone or simply being first in an area meet notability. The non-primary sources I'm seeing used here are mostly entires to an annual guid or mentions in articles. Not so much the in depth coverage we'd usually expect to see. I've been to Beth Israel numerous times. It's not that I don't know it's role in the community. I'm looking at it from a strictly WP policy POV. Niteshift36 (talk) 04:47, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
All I can say is that I've been through many synagogue-related AfDs, and regardless of what that essay says, these markers are consistently taken as indications of notability. Wikipedia policy is a mix of both written policy and typical practice; in this case, the notability guideline doesn't appear accurately capture or cover Wikipedia policy regarding synagogues. Jayjg (talk)05:12, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Synagogues aside for a moment, don't you see a problem with calling something notable solely because of it's age or simply because it is the only one in it's area? There are bridges in that same county that are older than Beth Israel, but there isn't significant third party coverage from reliable sources, which is what I feel is lacking here. Regardless, if there is a project dealing with the topic, then even considering an AfD will likely be a waste of time as it will simply turn into a project roll-call. Niteshift36 (talk) 08:12, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
