Misplaced Pages

:Articles for deletion/Persecution by Muslims: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 20:45, 4 October 2012 editVolunteer Marek (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers94,072 edits Persecution by Muslims← Previous edit Revision as of 21:33, 4 October 2012 edit undoVolunteer Marek (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers94,072 edits Persecution by MuslimsNext edit →
Line 8: Line 8:
*'''Delete''' because the form of the article is not proper for an encyclopedia. The information is notable and important and is already covered in other articles, as show by the "main article" links on the top of each section. ] (]) 17:50, 4 October 2012 (UTC) *'''Delete''' because the form of the article is not proper for an encyclopedia. The information is notable and important and is already covered in other articles, as show by the "main article" links on the top of each section. ] (]) 17:50, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' valid topic. ] ] 17:54, 4 October 2012 (UTC) *'''Keep''' valid topic. ] ] 17:54, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
::Note to closing admin: please note that an assertion is not an argument, and statements like these are generally discarded when closing AfDs.
::Note to Miacek - since you've never edited that article but came to it only after I made the edit, I guess that settles the question of who's following who around.<small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">]</span></small> 21:33, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' A valid topic, but is it a valid article? The majority of, if not all, the major religions have persecuted others, and atheists have had a go in some places too. (Not sure about Buddhist persecution of others...) All this does is group together links to one set of the articles about systematic persecutions, with short bits of padding. I would see an article about the rationale for persecution (and preferably better use for the title. And similarly for the other religions. (The atheists would be exempt from the holy books bit, of course.) No, I'm not volunteering. ] (]) 18:15, 4 October 2012 (UTC) *'''Comment''' A valid topic, but is it a valid article? The majority of, if not all, the major religions have persecuted others, and atheists have had a go in some places too. (Not sure about Buddhist persecution of others...) All this does is group together links to one set of the articles about systematic persecutions, with short bits of padding. I would see an article about the rationale for persecution (and preferably better use for the title. And similarly for the other religions. (The atheists would be exempt from the holy books bit, of course.) No, I'm not volunteering. ] (]) 18:15, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' I give my reasons for the article in ]. Islam has been in power for 14 centuries and has ruled land from the Atlantic to Indonesia. This vast history has many facets and we have a vast array of articles of different aspects of Islamic history. We have a similar article for ], which is the defining article for the ]. This category has 12 subcategories and 41 sub-sub-categories. If the subject is so vast and distributed among so many articles it makes sense to have a brief article to introduce and direct the reader. I wouldn’t suggest Persecution by Iroquois to discuss the vast genocide and ethnical cleansing of the ]. However, in the cases of Christianity and Islam we have 17 and 14 centuries of being in power. I believe the article on ] is superior to the article ] in that I carefully explained limits to persecution inherent in Islamic law and practice--to give the reader a heads-up to the scope and context without going into the full history. I cite well known mainstream authors (as often as I can) as well as classic textbooks (7th editions!) However, my main purpose is to redirect the reader and not duplicate the details of the individual articles. ] (]) 18:42, 4 October 2012 (UTC) *'''Keep''' I give my reasons for the article in ]. Islam has been in power for 14 centuries and has ruled land from the Atlantic to Indonesia. This vast history has many facets and we have a vast array of articles of different aspects of Islamic history. We have a similar article for ], which is the defining article for the ]. This category has 12 subcategories and 41 sub-sub-categories. If the subject is so vast and distributed among so many articles it makes sense to have a brief article to introduce and direct the reader. I wouldn’t suggest Persecution by Iroquois to discuss the vast genocide and ethnical cleansing of the ]. However, in the cases of Christianity and Islam we have 17 and 14 centuries of being in power. I believe the article on ] is superior to the article ] in that I carefully explained limits to persecution inherent in Islamic law and practice--to give the reader a heads-up to the scope and context without going into the full history. I cite well known mainstream authors (as often as I can) as well as classic textbooks (7th editions!) However, my main purpose is to redirect the reader and not duplicate the details of the individual articles. ] (]) 18:42, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Revision as of 21:33, 4 October 2012

Persecution by Muslims

Persecution by Muslims (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I'm pessimistic as to whether this will work, given this latest fad on Misplaced Pages of Muslim-baiting among some editors (for the record, I might as well say that I think that the Mohammed article should have his pic in it - this is a different cup of tea altogether though) but let's at least try. The article is a straight up POV WP:COATRACK which basically synthesizes everything bad done by a person or people who happened to be Muslim to others. It's obvious agenda pushing. None of the sources deal with the subject of the article, they're just cherry picked for anecdotes and isolated statements.  Volunteer Marek  17:31, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Note to closing admin: please note that an assertion is not an argument, and statements like these are generally discarded when closing AfDs.
Note to Miacek - since you've never edited that article but came to it only after I made the edit, I guess that settles the question of who's following who around. Volunteer Marek  21:33, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Comment A valid topic, but is it a valid article? The majority of, if not all, the major religions have persecuted others, and atheists have had a go in some places too. (Not sure about Buddhist persecution of others...) All this does is group together links to one set of the articles about systematic persecutions, with short bits of padding. I would see an article about the rationale for persecution (and preferably better use for the title. And similarly for the other religions. (The atheists would be exempt from the holy books bit, of course.) No, I'm not volunteering. Peridon (talk) 18:15, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Keep I give my reasons for the article in Talk:Persecution by Muslims. Islam has been in power for 14 centuries and has ruled land from the Atlantic to Indonesia. This vast history has many facets and we have a vast array of articles of different aspects of Islamic history. We have a similar article for Persecution by Christians, which is the defining article for the Category:Persecution by Christians. This category has 12 subcategories and 41 sub-sub-categories. If the subject is so vast and distributed among so many articles it makes sense to have a brief article to introduce and direct the reader. I wouldn’t suggest Persecution by Iroquois to discuss the vast genocide and ethnical cleansing of the Iroquois Wars. However, in the cases of Christianity and Islam we have 17 and 14 centuries of being in power. I believe the article on Persecution by Muslims is superior to the article Persecution by Christians in that I carefully explained limits to persecution inherent in Islamic law and practice--to give the reader a heads-up to the scope and context without going into the full history. I cite well known mainstream authors (as often as I can) as well as classic textbooks (7th editions!) However, my main purpose is to redirect the reader and not duplicate the details of the individual articles. Jason from nyc (talk) 18:42, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
Jason, somehow I'm not buying your explanation since you've included things like the fact that some pirates who happened to be Muslims engaged in... well, piracy, as an example of "Persecution by Muslim". And there's other nonsense like that in there. Remove it and there's basically nothing left inthe article. Volunteer Marek  20:45, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Delete unless a specific user or users volunteer to improve it with proper sourcing and neutrality, in which case userfy. Peridon's point is valid. The article in its current state is just plain old synthe, and given that this is just a gluing-together of other articles there's no real content to preserve; the clear and obvious intent is to demonize Muslims, as seems to be a favorite pastime of many users here. –Roscelese (talkcontribs) 18:45, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
    • Glue together? Most of the summaries select core examples with references. It isn't a cut-n-paste of the lead paragraphs of the articles. Can I use help? Damn right. And I'd gladly appreciate it. Jason from nyc (talk) 18:51, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Keep - It seems reasonable to have an article providing a general overview of this varied and extensive topic. That this form can be similarly used in other areas is not a valid argument. Ankh.Morpork 20:30, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
Categories: