Misplaced Pages

:Articles for deletion/Islamophilia - 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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by CesarB (talk | contribs) at 22:21, 12 June 2005 (fix unsigned tag; you were quick, but wrong timezone.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 22:21, 12 June 2005 by CesarB (talk | contribs) (fix unsigned tag; you were quick, but wrong timezone.)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Islamophilia

Neologism. SWAdair | Talk 05:47, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

  • Delete. Short POV piece, no chance it will ever be encyclopedic. Kaibabsquirrel 06:40, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete per 'squirrel. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson 07:10, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete - un-notable POV slander piece. Blackcats 09:26, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete POV attack page. JamesBurns 11:04, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge with Islamophobia - in the hope that they will somehow cancel each other out and implode. Failing that, delete. Grutness...wha? 13:04, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep This is a useful article that would benefit from more editing and contributions rather than removal. Just look at the amount of blind islamophilia that is doing rounds these days. Do a google search if you think it is neologism.
  • Delete. Islamophilia returns 248 hits. This article should be deleted and made a subsection of a different article, that might exist in the future, such as Islamophile, which returns a respectable 15,700 google hits. Wikibofh 15:18, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete, neologism. - Mustafaa 17:58, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete attack page. Nothing here worth keeping. carmeld1 10:18, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep Of course my POV is biased as I am a major contributor to this page. Islamophilia is a neologism, as is islamophobia. I have rewritten the page to make it more NPOV. Critics are invited to improve the quality of the page as they seem fit. --Germen 15:38, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep This is not an anti-islam propaganda article. It just describes people who try to atribute unreasonable characteristics to islam, and actually end up doing harm to Islam, for example, claiming that the Quran contains new scientific theories in a cryptic form, which, if decoded, can change the world, etc. I can understand that islamophiles would love to see such an article deleted, since they love to whitewash anything that THEY THINK reflects badly on Islam, or stops short of attributing to Islam all the best qualities possible. (Previous edit by User:70.105.179.96 -Blackcats 07:00, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC))
  • Keep (sockpuppet) Though it does certainly needs a cleanup. (Previous edit by User:128.118.126.8 -Blackcats 07:00, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)) - User's two edits are both to this VFD page. --FCYTravis 08:43, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep (sockpuppet) It is pretty basic and could be expanded. Keep it. (Previous edit by User:66.214.185.252 -Blackcats 07:00, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)) - User's two edits are both to this VFD page. --FCYTravis 08:43, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep and enlarge. (sockpuppet) You should defend free speach. The word suggested makes sense. Keep, keep, keep. (Previous edit by User:82.36.79.32 -Blackcats 07:00, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)) - User's only edit is to this VFD page. --FCYTravis 08:43, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep (sockpuppet) It is a good start and probably needs expanding. Keep it. (Previous edit by User:209.76.108.207 -Blackcats 07:00, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)) - User's only edit is to this VFD page. --FCYTravis
  • Keep (sockpuppet) Either merge stub with related article or keep independent with expectation of expansion. Shouldn't be allowed to fall victim to PC reactionism. (Previous edit by User:141.152.101.211 -Blackcats 07:00, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)) - User's only edit is to this VFD page. --FCYTravis
  • Keep (sockpuppet) The vote of the Muslims about Islam is generally charged with emotions and subjectivity. It is not realistic to expect objective opinions from believers of any religion about their own faith. My vote is to keep it and expand on it. (Previous edit by User:72.21.32.122 -Blackcats 07:00, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)) - User has four edits, one to this VFD page. --FCYTravis
  • keep (sockpuppet) and expand very topical if islamophobia is in so should be Islamophilia could do with expanding (Previous edit by User:172.188.217.175 -Blackcats 07:00, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)) - User's only edit is to this VFD page. --FCYTravis
  • Delete neologism. Axon 08:26, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete - sockpuppet limit exceeded (apologies to RickK) --FCYTravis 08:39, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • keep (sockpuppet) - This is not islampobia - it is rational and it is free speech — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.9.149.56 (talkcontribs) 12:32, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC) (User's only edit is to this VFD page. Axon 13:26, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC))
  • Delete - The differences between the word "Islamophobia" and "Islamophilia": "Islamophobia" is actually used (Google search for Islamophilia: 215 results; for Islamophobia: 119,000 — obviously the latter is the real word); the article about it does not overflow with bias. As for the argument that an article about "Islamophilia" makes it "fair" to have an article about Islamophobia: I see no "Semitophilia" articles! No "homophilia" articles (simply redirection to the homosexuality page). An encyclopedia cannot contain this bias. No "Islamophilia" nonsense, please. What you define as being "Islamophilic" is simply following Islam. And to call Islam, or any religion, "irrational" is biased and stepping out of the role of an encyclopedia. User:Emiellaiendiay 10:36 a.m., 12 June 2005
  • Keep - The article accurately describes the characteristics of a certain group of people from an objective POV. Deleting it would be the irrational thing to do. Definitely keep it and expand on it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.195.42.126 (talkcontribs) 22:04, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)