Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Arbustoo (talk | contribs) at 04:09, 21 January 2006 (→[]). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Islam in Iceland

The article itself claims non-notablility by saying that Iceland has the world's lowest number of Muslims. Also, it doesn't really give any real content or even a dicdef. In comparison, even Islam in Iraq doesn't have an article. King of Hearts | (talk) 01:18, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

• Delete Unreferenced. Even if referenced, merge to Islam. Dlyons493 Talk 01:29, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
• Merge into whatever article is appropriate for counts of Muslim population. Ashibaka tock 01:34, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
• Comment Iceland has Muslims? Wow. Merge into Islam, that's an interesting tidbit, I always thought that Iceland was 100% homogenous in most cultural categories, I guess they're just at the high 90s. Karmafist 01:48, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

I read it's mostly like some construction workers and engineers from Turkey and Pakistan or the Mideast. I'm not sure they are even citizens. (I read an article about immigrants to Iceland during the Bobby Fischer deal. I did not create this article though)--T. Anthony 02:57, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

• Merge as per Ashibaka --Bletch 04:46, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
• Merge to Muslims in Western Europe, as long as it's clear the numbers aren't from The Economist. Nateji77 05:09, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
• Merge as per Ashibaka -- Zen611 05:12, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
• Merge into Islam (it has a section on demographics). Fagstein 05:18, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete unless it has changed from current version. If this was merged it would make any article it was merged to worse. I searched online but couldn't find any information except for anecdotal talkes from Muslims in Iceland. gren グレン 06:33, 20 January 2006 (UTC)I didn't use those sources because I feared they weren't scholarly at all... but, good enough to make me keep. gren グレン 07:13, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
  • I'm not sure they are either, but the government report should be close enough. Oddly enough I still don't think this amounts to much and personally I'd say Merge to Religion in Iceland which I just created.--T. Anthony 07:34, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
    • Haha, I would agree with you but I don't think it can be merged anywhere without throwing off an article. Iceland really doesn't matter in terms of Islam. It'd be like merging some of the pissant towns in the U.S. to their counties. Some things are just irrelevant in the larger context. However, it is valuable in the sense that X religion in Y country is valuable. That's why I'm against merging. gren グレン 09:30, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
• Delete merge per Ashibaka Dakota ~ ε 06:49, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
• Strong keep Important for covering religion in Iceland. Merging it into a list will not serve that purpose. Choalbaton 07:57, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

• Keep. There's a whole series of "Islam in ..." articles, and this one makes for an interesting complement to that, exactly because it's about a country where Islam is marginal. That's not making it "non-notable", in my view. Since comparable info for other countries is distributed over that series and not centralized in one article, there also seems to be no obvious place for a merge. The article is decently written and sourced. Lukas 08:06, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per Lukas. Article is short but concise, as well as being referenced and properly categorised; it comes close to being the perfect stub. Shortening and/or merging into a list would defeat the purpose of the article which is to expand on the info available. As mentioned, it is well-categorised so adding it to a list would be redundant as well as throwing away information that can only be presented in an article form. Merging it to some other article does not fit in with the intention of creating a series of "Islam in..." articles. Zunaid 09:33, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
• keep. "The article itself claims... that Iceland has the world's lowest number of Muslims." doesnt that make it notable? BL kiss the lizard 09:46, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per Lukas and to counter systemic bias. Just zis  Guy, you know? / AfD? 10:40, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

I need to use my powers for good instead of just silliness:) This article was just a sentence, and an inaccurate one at that, then I decided what the hey. Still how can this be justified as an article in its own right when there are so many more important "Islam in" articles to do? I think it'd make more sense to have a Religion in Iceland article and put this in. If you're worried it'd be lost until then, don't be. I did much of the work here and I can copy this to my talk page until a Religion in Iceland article is ready.--T. Anthony 11:27, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm missing one of my books on Iceland that could really fill in the stuff on Pietism and all. Oh well, maybe later.--T. Anthony 11:50, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

• Keep its been expanded greatly since the one sentence substub that was afd'd -- Astrokey44|talk 11:11, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
• Strong keep. We have Islam in the United Kingdom and Islam in Germany. Whether Iceland has the lowest number of Muslims is inconsequential - it's still a notable topic. Jamyskis Whisper, Contribs 12:41, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Only because tradition seems to allow a "(religion) in (country)" for each notable grouping. Hmm, maybe someone should start setting up "Atheism in (country)" articles. --StuffOfInterest 13:30, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Good idea, although I can't imagine articles like Atheism in Saudi Arabia going very far. Jamyskis Whisper, Contribs 13:49, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
• How about a merge into Religion in Iceland, a fine start on an article by User:T. Anthony, which links this article but doesn't have any islam-in-iceland content itself. I see the "(somereligion) in (somecountry)" articles as being subarticles of "Religion in (somecountry)" - that is, they're useful if there's a lot to say about somereligion in that country, but otherwise unnecessary. Also, wouldn't the Vatican City probably have fewer Muslims? CDC (talk) 17:34, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
• Weak Keep per Lukas, though the article does need to be heavily expanded --TBC 18:37, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep or merge Arbustoo 04:09, 21 January 2006 (UTC)