Talk:Gavriel Holtzberg

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Notability?[edit]

With all due respect, does Gavriel Holtzberg have any notability aside from being murdered in the Mumbai attacks? Jpatokal (talk) 12:21, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, which is why the article will likely be deleted/redirected after a while. WWGB (talk) 14:27, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
He's of borderline notability. He was sort of a leader of a Jewish community (Mumbai), which has been a precedent for notability. However, borderline bios should only have stand-alone articles if no home can be found for the bio. In Holtzberg's case, the Nariman House article is the perfect place for his bio. Thus it should be merged/redirect there. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 17:11, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
He's of fairly certain notability, and this article contains things the page on the Nariman House cannot possibily contain, i.e., his bio (ex. his children, his schooling, his family, his work with Chabad prior to Mumbai, etc...). Epson291 (talk) 12:56, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
At this time, he is so intertwined with the Nariman House it would not be problematic for the article to have a subsection for his bio. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 23:15, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It seems that more and more information about Gavriel Holtzberg and his wife Rivka are coming out each day. It would be worth waiting a while to see what their real accomplishments have been and it seems there are many. It seems to me that they both have notability on their own as leaders of Mimbai's Jewish community and as founders of a very successful Jewish center in a major international metropolis. solomonmaimen (talk) 12:29, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Rivka Holtzberg was also a director of Chabad in Mumbai and a leader of the community in her own right. I think that she has as much notability as Gavriel Holtzberg has. solomonmaimen (talk) 12:39, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You just copied this article into that one, it can't stay like that. Epson291 (talk) 12:56, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I tend to agree with Jpatokal and Brewcrewer. Seems to me like a case of WP:ONEEVENT. -- Nudve (talk) 14:40, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
He is very famous though for being killed, but also he was a rabbi who ran the only Western synagogue in Mumbai and according to several sources, was a religious leader for the local Jewish community. There is a source for instance, from May of 2006, far before the attack. Epson291 (talk) 15:13, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but that's mentioned in Nariman House. I'm not sure if it confers individual notability. -- Nudve (talk) 15:40, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
For instance, this ABC News article "Thousands at Funeral of Jewish Couple Slain in Mumbai", which is one of thousands on the Rabbi, talks about his funeral and the future for their 2 year old orphan, that has nothing to do directly with the Nariman House, but rather the notability of the individual (and that can't be covered in the Nariman House article anyways). Epson291 (talk) 15:51, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm still ambivalent. On one hand, he does get talked about a lot. On the other hand, I'm not sure if this is enough to pass WP:NOTNEWS and WP:NOTMEMORIAL. -- Nudve (talk) 16:01, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
He also led services Friday night at Knesset Eliyahoo, that's 2 of the 8 shuls in Mumbai, and he provided the kosher meat for the local community, that's pretty notable. Epson291 (talk) 05:35, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Alright. If you believe he's notable, I'll respect your judgment. Anyway, if this article is kept, Rivka Holtzberg should redirect here. Cheers, Nudve (talk) 07:13, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Providing kosher meat makes somebody notable!? You've got to be kidding me. Jpatokal (talk) 12:01, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The fact that almost all the media outlets in the world discussed their activities not just in passing, but in great detail--unlike almost all of the other victims of the Mumbai terror attacks--many in prime-time, makes them extremely notable and clearly deserving of separate articles. Yehoishophot Oliver (talk) 15:26, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:ONEEVENT. Gavriel Holtzberg can and should be covered in the context of the Mumbai attack, specifically in Nariman House, but If reliable sources only cover the person in the context of a particular event, then a separate biography is unlikely to be warranted.. Jpatokal (talk) 17:23, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The shear coverage is about him as an individual and not the Narmian house, I wrote below that he is easily the most famous of the victims. The material published on him transends just in the context of the event. In addition, to his important role in the Mumbai Jewish community. Epson291 (talk) 18:13, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Extreme muslim terrorists"?[edit]

Can you please explain to me the difference between "extremist muslim terrorists" and muslim terrorists. Please do not whitewash what terrorism is, they were muslim terrorists which already make them extremists. Putting the word "extremist" makes it seem that muslims killing people is not an everyday occurrence. (which it is).—Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.44.60.244 (talk • contribs)

"Notable"?[edit]

If a cold-blooded murderer like Samir Kuntar can have his own page in Wikipedia, then certainly these people should. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.176.123.36 (talk) 16:32, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • You seem to equate "notable" with "honorable". That is incorrect. Somebody can be notable because of being evil. Read WP:N and you'll see the difference. Seome of the victims of the heinous Mumbai attacks will be notable, because of other things they did before they died. Others will not be notable except for being murdered. The latter is not sufficient for an independent encyclopedic article. --Crusio (talk) 17:09, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Holtzbergs did a lot more in their lives than simply being murdered. They were devoted to helping others as missionaries. They were unselfish and kind and are people we should all aspire to be like. They are notable and belong in Wikipedia.(Hyperionsteel (talk) 01:20, 5 December 2008 (UTC))[reply]

yes? I have at least 20 personal friends who are devoted to helping others and generally good people. None of them qualifies for a Wikipedia article. Being a good person often means that you take less credit than you could. Stop connecting notability with character or goodness. Sheesh, Nero, Attila the Hun and Pol Pot (to avoid Godwining this) clearly are highly notable, yet they were about as evil, selfish, power-hungry and cruel as a human being can be. "they were unselfish ... and belong in Wikipedia" is about as flawed as it gets. --dab (𒁳) 09:46, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That is not the only argument on notability, as has been discussed on this page. Epson291 (talk) 10:19, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This article has plenary of third party references from mainstream sources. That counts strongly toward the requirments of making this article "notable." (Hyperionsteel (talk) 23:56, 13 January 2009 (UTC))[reply]

I agree, with all of the third part references, it is notable. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 00:41, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I removed the two tags, it's been well over 30 days. Epson291 (talk) 02:38, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why no one is adding information about the barbarity of the attack?[edit]

See these links:

1 2 3 4 Axxn (talk) 14:29, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The reason why no one is adding this "information" is WP:V. You provide links to two propaganda websites – IsraelNationalNews.com and EuropeNews – and to an apparently automated news-aggregation website without any real editorial oversight, let alone fact-checking (ShortNews.com). They all seem to draw their content from the same sensationalist Rediff.com report (Doctors shocked at hostages's torture), the accuracy of which was later contested in a Jerusalem Post article (Mumbai doctor finds no signs of torture on Chabad House bodies). The latter article quoted by name an actual doctor who had seen the victims whereas the initial report cited only unnamed sources. --Bwiki (talk) 11:54, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge from Rivka Holtzberg[edit]

Let's discuss. I'll start. No independent notability for the wife - no need to have two articles. Let's have one. WP:NOTMEMORIAL, WP:BLP1E. -- Y not? 15:38, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, I think it should be redirected here, I don't see any independent notability for her. Epson291 (talk) 16:20, 2 December 2008 (UTC) Neutral for maybe another week, see what happens. Epson291 (talk) 05:59, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I also agree that there is no independent notability for Rivka Holtzberg and that both articles should be merged. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Davshul (talk • contribs) 11:51, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • It's pretty evident that neither of them has sufficient notability. Once the brouhaha has calmed down, both articles should be taken to AfD and deleted. But not immediately, as in the current emotional atmosphere with everyone still reeling from these heinous attacks it will be difficult to have a rational discussion. The foregoing goes for most of the victims of this attack, of course. --Crusio (talk) 15:36, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, GH was arguably the religious leader for all of Mumbai's Jews, which is a (weak) claim of independent notability. (I don't believe the local Jews had a rabbi.) In any event, a couple which received a state funeral at which Shimon Peres and both chief rabbis spoke is kinda huge, easily the most "famous" of all the victims of the Mumbai attacks. For every BLP1E argument there's a Mychal F. Judge and a Mark David Chapman and a Leon Klinghoffer and literally thousands of other notables. (I hate BLP1E...) Having said that, one article for two ought to be enough - RH's article adds nothing. -- Y not? 23:36, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]


I have no objection to merging the articles (as long as redirects are used for their names). However, removing the articles entirely is completely unreasonable and unacceptable. Terrorists and murderers are routinely given wiki pages, so why not their victims. If terrorists get their own pages but victims don't, then there is something seriously wrong with Wikipedia.(Hyperionsteel (talk) 01:52, 5 December 2008 (UTC))[reply]

I merged Rivka's article into here per the talk. I also agree that Gavriel is easily the most famous of all of the vicims of the attack. Epson291 (talk) 17:22, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Gavriel Holtzberg. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:03, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Gavriel Holtzberg. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:45, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Gavriel_Holtzberg&oldid=1207630399"