The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. 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.

The result was delete. Comments by first-time contributors or single-purpose accounts have been given low weighting. A subsequent redirect to squeegee or mop might be appropriate, but as for which, I leave to editor discretion. A note that original research is not permitted on wiktionary, either. Neıl 15:18, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Spunga[edit]

Spunga (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Disputed PROD. Non-notable and unverified neologism. Only reference is a blog & suspect it is WP:MADEUP nancy (talk) 22:23, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Keilanatalk(recall) 00:54, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I think the article says that spunga is a method of cleaning and includes design of buildings etc. and the rag just seems to be used to dry the wet floor after the squeegee-like thing is used. This seems to be unique. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Myteemouse (talkcontribs)

  • Please stop making multiple !votes. --Evb-wiki (talk) 13:58, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Myteemouse is correct -- architectural schools in Israel have course that teaches one how to design a building or dwelling to accomodate the spunga hole so that the water pouring through the hole does not interfere with other residences. Additionally dwelling are designed to slope gently towards the spunga hole (know in hebrew as khor spunga). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.129.97.254 (talk) 15:16, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There have been a lot of keep votes with claims similar to this one, mostly from anonymous users. If anyone has some sources to support these claims, then please provide them in a timely manner. --NickPenguin(contribs) 18:17, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Note the rabbinic discourse related to spunga - especially this year of "shmita" Shut She'eilat Shlomo - Questions of Jewish Law

A talk given after lunch at the yeshiva -

"Sponga" during Shemitta

Q: Is it permissible to do "sponga" (cleaning the floor by pouring a bucket of water on the floor, swishing it around with a cloth on a squeegee and pushing the water into holes in the floor or outside. It is a popular way to clean one's home in Israel because most houses have stone floors) and push the water onto the ground outside during the Shemitta year?

A: It is permissible for various reasons:

1. The prohibition of watering the ground during the Shemitta year is a rabbinic prohibition. This is unlike watering the ground on Shabbat and Yom Tov which is a Torah prohibition (a sub-labor [toladah] of "Zore'a – seeding"). It is therefore forbidden on Shabbat and Yom Tov to wash one's hands over the ground. One must be especially careful on Sukkot. During the Shemittah year, however, watering is only a rabbinic prohibition.

2. According to the majority of Rishonim (early authorities), observing Shemittah nowadays is a rabbinic mitzvah.

3. Watering the ground by pushing the water from "sponga" is an "unintended act which is not beneficial to him," since one does not want to water the ground or violate Shemittah, but needs some place to put the water.

4. Some people have pipes on their porch which brings the water to the ground. If the water travels through the pipe onto the ground it is called a "grama" – an indirect act.

Since the act is far from a Torah prohibition and there are extenuating circumstances, it is permissible. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.129.97.254 (talk) 21:20, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Please stop making multiple !votes. --Evb-wiki (talk) 00:55, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This is a link to the article the above excerpt came from: http://www.ou.org/shabbat_shalom/article/aviner_parashat_shemot_5768/#shutshlomo --NickPenguin(contribs) 21:28, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, nobody denies the term is _genuine_. The question is whether or not it's _notable_. See WP:DICT. Tevildo (talk) 00:00, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, Seems notable to a lot of people, and I'd hate to see the state of the country without it!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.226.223.97 (talk) 02:02, 3 January 2008 (UTC) 99.226.223.97 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
  • It is so non-notable that, after 10 days of discussion, there is still not a single reliable source supporting this article. --Evb-wiki (talk) 02:06, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is so notable that the discussion here is significant. Unfortunately Evb must live in a gated community with little knowledge of the outside world. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.129.97.254 (talk) 13:38, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
First of all, Sponja (nut Spunga) is a very well known term in Hebrew. Google ספונג'ה and see how many hits you get. The term is used for the specific method of using a rag at the end of the squeegee. It also has a cultural connotation, as a "lowly" form of cleaning. Yet, the term does not even have an article on the Hebrew wikipedia, so I believe it should be moved to Wiktionary or deleted. 88.134.146.103 (talk) 20:58, 4 January 2008 (UTC)88.134.146.103 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
  • The anglicised spelling is indeed SPUNGA (not sponja). It may also belong in the Hebrew wiki, but given the the majority of people living in Israel speak English and many do not speak Hebrew, it should cetainly remain here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Poodwahr (talkcontribs) 21:20, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Why do you say that? Google "sponja" together with "cleaning" and you'll find many results, for example this [3]; Google "spunga" with "cleaning" and you'll find only wikipedia. I'm an Israeli by birth, and for a while even I wasn't sure what you're talking about. 88.134.146.103 (talk) 13:18, 5 January 2008 (UTC)88.134.146.103 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Now I see that 'sponga' is also a spelling that is used in english (though it's incorrect as far as pronunciation goes). Here's a few more refs: [4], [5].88.134.146.103 (talk) 13:24, 5 January 2008 (UTC)88.134.146.103 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

How many sources are needed - the article provides one external link and one reference, and looking here in the discussions there are countless sources.Gustoad (talk) 17:03, 5 January 2008 (UTC) — Gustoad (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

It is more a case of quality than quantity. The issue with the cited sources is that they do not meet Wikipedia's criteria of verifiability as they are blogs or other similar web-content. nancy (talk) 18:00, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Again, please stop making multiple !votes. --Evb-wiki (talk) 18:52, 6 January 2008 (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.