Zotiel (angel): Fails WP:GNG .  Edward-Woodrow :) [ talk ] 14:45, 23 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions .  Edward-Woodrow :) [ talk ] 14:45, 23 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] In which case, how does my draft article differ from many other Wikipedia stubs (not just those related to religion) which do not have as much references and "secondary analysis" as mine and yet remain up there?  I would also welcome if you (or the adjudicators and other community members) also have other suggestions such as inclusion of this text under some main article where you think discussion of Zotiel is better suited.  Otherwise, your nomination is just being arbitrary and implies that the contributions made are so minuscule regardless if it was mentioned in the book of Enoch as among the angels.  Pcbyed ( talk ) 15:44, 23 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS .  Edward-Woodrow :) [ talk ] 15:52, 23 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Paul Christian B. Yang-ed This is an article not a draft PaulGamerBoy360 ( talk ) 00:05, 24 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Oh my pardon, I used the wrong word Pcbyed ( talk ) 00:32, 24 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Paul Christian B. Yang-ed : Even if it was mentioned in the book of Enoch as among the angels , it isn't necessarily notable .  Edward-Woodrow :) [ talk ] 00:27, 24 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] My objective in making this article was somehow to make an article that would also inform about the other angels that do not receive as much attention as the other angels.  In this way, I was hoping to contribute to expanding people's knowledge on certain details or biblical personages.  I think the attention this angel receives is quite notable in terms of people who discuss it compared to other stubs in English wikipedia that have not been deleted and yet remain available for years without being notified.  Now, an alternative option I am also thinking is if there is a wikipedia page for a summary of list of angels or personalities mentioned in the Book of Enoch.  We can just insert this discussion of Zotiel as a section if it is too "un-notable" for the standards of the body.  (By the way, is there a voting a process to determine "notability" here?)  That is another suggestion.  What would you (or anyone else here) also suggest?  Pcbyed ( talk ) 00:36, 24 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] There is emphatically no "voting process", consensus is determined, based on notability guidelines .  Edward-Woodrow :) [ talk ] 01:57, 24 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bible-related deletion discussions .  A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 06:10, 24 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletion discussions .  A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 06:10, 24 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions .  A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 06:10, 24 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak delete as my own search yielded nothing more than trivial mentions.  ~ Pbritti ( talk ) 06:20, 24 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  "One reference in a religious text" -- This was not just any religious text. The Book of Enoch was influential in Second Temple Judaism (the Jewish religion during the 5+ centuries between 516 BCE and 70 CE). It was influential among Jews during this period and then subsequently rejected by Rabbinic Judaism after the destruction of the Second Temple. It was also influential among early Christians; see Reception of the Book of Enoch in premodernity . Neither Judaism nor Christianity had an official canon during this period and Enoch was widely accepted on the same level as other Biblical books. Today, Enoch is part of the official canon of the Bible in the Ethiopian Christian churches and Beta Israel (Ethiopian Judaism). We traditionally have articles on similar minor Biblical figures including others in Enoch such as Sariel , Yomiel , Sathariel , Shamsiel , Zaqiel , Bezaliel , Ananiel , Batariel , Armaros , etc. Zotiel is also mentioned in later works far outside the Christian and Jewish mainstream in areas such as Hollow Earth theory, modern day Anunnakism , popular culture works about angels, etc. [51] [52] [53] [54] [55] -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 07:13, 24 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] All of the sources listed above are unreliable.  At least one of them is a work of fiction.  If anything, we could consider turning this into a redirect , maybe to Book of Enoch .  ~ Pbritti ( talk ) 14:33, 24 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Speaking of source reliability, what is your assessment of the reliability of sources currently in the article?  Some of them are primary, and I'm a tad skeptical of The Language of the Angels: Calling Angelic Assistance, Healing and Wisdom Into Your Life .  Edward-Woodrow :) [ talk ] 15:10, 24 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The Language of the Angels is a spiritual devotional text.  As best I can tell, it could be used to establish some minor aspect of notability, but that would be stretching it.  I'll look some more, but the angel in question doesn't seem to be of great enough note to warrant its own article.  ~ Pbritti ( talk ) 15:35, 24 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I've removed The Language of Angels but the other sources seem fine (I've also added a new source, Black 1985).  However, I don't think the sources I can access add up to significant coverage (Gil apparently has three pages on the subject, but I can't access it and it appears to be in Hebrew).  Sojourner in the earth ( talk ) 17:13, 24 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Pbritti , my point in listing those resources was not to use them as reliable sources -- most are downright fringe-y.  It was instead to point out that the brief story of Zotiel influenced subsequent developments.  -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 05:31, 25 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Not denying that the Book of Enoch is important.  But is one passing mention in it enough to indicate notability?  Edward-Woodrow :) [ talk ] 15:14, 24 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Book of Enoch .  I was unable to find much significant discussion in reliable sources, even searching variant names "Zutiel", "Zutuel", "Zutel", etc.  However, I think a redirect would be preferable to deletion in order to preserve the content and refs, as it's very possible that this information could one day find a place within a larger article (e.g. " Angels in the Book of Enoch ", which some of the smaller articles in Category:Angels in the Book of Enoch could also be merged into).  Sojourner in the earth ( talk ) 17:07, 24 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep as the references add up.  gidonb ( talk ) 23:46, 30 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] What do you mean?  Edward-Woodrow :) [ talk ] 16:59, 7 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Meaning that, in addition to the mention in the Book of Enoch , also later mentions of the figure count toward notability.  gidonb ( talk ) 17:57, 13 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: as at  the moment there's no consensus Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Star Mississippi 01:21, 31 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep .  Without seeing the Gil source it's hard to be sure, but we have some coverage in Stock-Hesketh in Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha that references Gil with some depth, making it seem likely.  In contrast, there are clear directions for the eastern journey, where Enoch is on his own,and actually flies over the head of an angel, Zutuel.  40 ... 40.  Though see Black (Book of Enoch, p. 179), who thinks that Zutiel is a corruption of the text.  This angel appears in Codex Panopolitanus as Zotiel and Ethiopic as lamal’ak zutu’êl; Knibb (Ethiopic Book of Enoch, I, p. 101, line 22) and note.  Charles has zute’êl and notes variants (Ethiopic Enoch, p. 72) and thinks that this is ’seemingly the angel who guards the entrance to Paradise’ (APOT, p. 207).  Gil suggests that he is connected with the eastern journey as the ’angel who resurrects the dead.  He is the angelological correspondent of the Tree of Life’; M. Gil ’Enoch in the Land of Eternal Life’ Tarbiz 38.4 (1969), pp.  i-iii (ii).  .  A merge may be appropriate even given all this if it improves the main article.  — siro χ o 06:41, 31 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  02:46, 7 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Seems to be missing from many places including Book of Enoch , Category:Angels in the Book of Enoch , and List of angels in theology which kind of suggests less notability relative to other subjects of the same genre.  Would need to be added if kept.  - Indefensible ( talk ) 19:45, 12 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment not being in the mentioned category seems to me to have less to do with notability and much more to do with editing.  That is now rectified.  (No comment on the lack of mention in other articles).  Lady of Shalott 15:33, 17 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Final relist, I see weak arguments for Delete and others for Keep and Redirect.  This might be closed as No consensus.  It would help to bring in more subject matter experts.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  02:59, 14 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Leaning keep Book of Enoch is a very well studied religious text and I don't see a redirect or merge improving the sites coverage on this topic.  ★Trekker ( talk ) 19:11, 17 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I don't think a passing mention in the Book of Enoch is enough to establish notability.  Edward-Woodrow :) [ talk ] 19:41, 17 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I didn't say it was.  ★Trekker ( talk ) 03:07, 18 August 2023 (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.

Discussion outcome: no consensus