Commons:Deletion requests/File:4QLev a.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
unnecessary redirect. Qumranhöhle (talk) 15:33, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
- For years the manuscript was known as 4QLeva name 4Q119 is relatively new - John Belushi (talk) 17:28, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
- "Relatively new" or not does not play any role for the question of "correctness."
- 4Q119 has been the (/one of the) official designation(s) since 1992. That is not "relatively new."
- 4QLeva never designated this manuscript which is Greek. Sigla without any language specification for Qumran MSS designated only Hebrew MSS.
- 4QLeva is thus a complete misnomer (not just an unnecessary redirect) and should definitely be deleted. --Qumranhöhle (talk) 09:17, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
- There is no erroneous or misleading. It's the old official name - John Belushi (talk) 17:04, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
- Restating wrongs doesn't make them right. As written: 4QLeva has never been the official designation for that manuscript. Greek MSS are designated specially with LXX or gr or the like. 4QLeva would denote a Hebrew manuscript (and it does not exist in that case because the supralinear index-letter a is used for a Lev-Num manuscript, therefore only 4QLev-Numa exists and likewise 4QLevb resp. 4QNumb and so on. That might indicate something, doesn't it (just delete all the references that belong to 4QLevia)? The only use of 4QLeva I can find that really refers to 4Q119 is Price, and he is simply wrong - you may ask every Qumran scholar you want. And if you're still not convinced then please bring any reference for the alleged use. --Qumranhöhle (talk) 17:55, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Keep Old filename has been used since 2012. Don't break links from external sites. --Sebari (talk) 22:42, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
- There are no links from external sites. Keeping redirects may not hurt, stupidity and ignorance do - like desinformation. --Qumranhöhle (talk) 15:13, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
Kept: Keeping a redirect doesn't hurt. Yann (talk) 00:10, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
