Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rabbi Yitzchok Adlerstein
I cannot help but notice, despite the very large number of edits to the article, that there is still not a '''single''' |reliable source.  (And ''please'', before venting on how the sources are ''"Obviously"'' reliable, take a few minutes to read the guideline to see what "reliable source" ''means'').  Self-published articles, trivial ''en-passant'' mentions, one-liner quotes and blog entries do '''not''' qualify.  At this point, the '''only''' argument for notabiliy set forward sums up to "he is a Jewish Orthodox rabi so the rules applied to everyone else do not apply to him because he's ''obviously'' notable and there is no need to source that".I see a lot of "sources", none of which establish notability, even in the aggregate.  Many of the so-called sources do not even ''mention'' the rabbi!  Or are written ''by'' him.  I see a lot of special pleading, and a lot of "but he's an Orthodox Rabbi".  I see a lot of accusations of bad faith, and a lot of cries of wikilawyering.Orthodox Rabbis are '''not''' automatically notable.  Whether the topic of an article is an Orthodox Rabbi or a Buddhist dancer, the criterion are '''and MUST be''' the same.  &mdash;&nbsp
— User:Coren, 20:13, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:RS (Wikipedia:Reliable sources)