Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Islamic athletics

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 of the debate was no consensus to delet the article. Mailer Diablo 00:32, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Islamic athletics

I originally nominated this for speedy deletion but the creator of the article laughed at it due to the nomination of several of his articles yesterday for deletion. However, this article should be deleted because it is an empty or very short article providing little or no context. There really is no such thing as Islamic athletics, no specific relationship between Islam and athletics. joturner 00:54, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Note also the copyright violation pointed out by Deiz. joturner 04:42, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

It looks like the submission of the possible copyright violation was incomplete - Deiz has to follow the instructions at the top. Additionally, I'm not sure if there is a violation, since the site has a pretty lenient policy: "Permission is granted to all to take material from this site, subject to the following two conditions: (1) Material used must be attributed to www.islam-qa.com , (2) Material must be reproduced faithfully and without alteration or omission." Schizombie 10:09, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

• I personally have nothing against this article, indeed it's interesting and scores well on the anit-systemic-bias-o-meter. However the copyvio (which is a section of rather than the whole article, I have now listed it at the relevant copyvio problem page) does not reference its source, rather it says "one scholar says..." which is as good as saying "my mate thinks..." or "this bloke down the pub said...". If it is properly referenced per point (1) from Schizombie then it's probably no longer an issue. However, the article still needs lots of work and it would be a credit to those who are spending time blowing hot air defending it on this AfD page if they focussed their efforts on wikifiing the article. For starters a going over by a native English speaker familiar with the topic and au fait with Wikipedia style policies is urgently required. Deiz 11:02, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Bro, queit it will ya? Why are you so gang ho on deleting? Stop making me answer to all of this, please! You saw it yourself, i expanded Islamic athletics to a full article in no-time, and the same can be with the other articles. As you said YOURSELF: "Islam is considered a dīn (way of life) rather than a simple religion, we could connect Islam with practically any topic". YES, YOU ARE CORRECT! --Striver 02:44, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Comment. Someone added additional articles to be proposed for deletion above, after people had already begun expressing opinions (below) on this AfD. I've removed those additions, because it appears to me that adding articles to be deleted after people had already expressed opinions is a very improper abuse of process. The closing admin may wish to review this page carefully to ascertain which votes were cast before, during and after these changes. -ikkyu2 (talk) 09:27, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Ikkyu2, I think you are over-emphasizing the significance of that move regarding the related articles. You deleted the additional articles which was reasonable. But then to go back four hours later and add another comment regarding the move as well as clarifying your vote (which after your deletion was not ambiguous) is just rubbing it in. I talked to the editors whose votes appeared to be ambiguous or split between the original and related articles and they have all responded. Clearly all of the votes below relate to Islamic athletics as they all clearly refer to the name of this article in some way, were cast before the addition or after the removal of the related articles, or were fixed after contacting the respective editor. To say adding the related articles was a "very improper abuse of process" is a complete exaggeration. Clearly, no harm was done and no careful review of this page is necessary. joturner 11:09, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

To be clear, if this issue is not explicitly and comprehensively addressed by the closing admin, I will submit this AfD for deletion review on the grounds that the normal process was interfered with in a way that could be construed as improper. -ikkyu2 (talk) 23:45, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vote

• Speedy Delete as nominator. joturner 00:55, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy Delete CSD A1 no context. A speedy delete is deleting in the light of speed. -ikkyu2 (talk) 01:04, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
  • In light of irregularities that have occurred during this AfD, I am clarifying my opinion: Delete Islamic athletics. No opinion expressed regarding other articles. -ikkyu2 (talk) 09:29, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per Talk:List of Muslims/Proposed Organization A. --Striver 01:09, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete this one is empty. KI 01:14, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Would we also accept Catholic athletics, Jewish athletics, Buddhist athletics? Monkeyman^(talk) 01:18, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Comment If they hade their own distinct laws forcing to do certain things, yes. If they have a distinc history to tell, yes.

• Delete as I am not aware of any muslims-only stheltic competition.Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 01:28, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Delete --HappyCamper 02:43, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

  So what are we doing now that the afd is all of the sudden about 4 articles? Must i spend 4 houres RIGHT NOW to show that there is potential in the articles? Bro, please end this! Go and make yourself usefull, go and google some information and help me CREAT article about Islam, rather than wasting everyones energy one afds! --Striver 02:47, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

  Relax, and simply trust the system! Now that a copyright violation has been raised, I might actually speedy the article, but since my internet phone booth is charging me lots of money per minute, I must log off and do it later. --HappyCamper 05:38, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

• Delete: Don't create an aritcle until you have something to say. savidan^{(talk) (e@)} 02:50, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
• Keep the Islamic athletics page and expand it to cover genuine Islamic athletics, because in 1980 there was a one-off Islamic Games for results of which see [1], followed by the new Islamic Solidarity Games held in 2005, the results of which can be seen at [2]. The competitors were only from Muslim countries and the games were held in Makkah. The Islamic Solidarity Games were established by the Organisation of the Islamic Conference with a resolution to be found here -> [3], so pretty much a Muslims-only athletic competition. Green Giant 03:01, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy Delete as Copyvio at [4] and [5] among others. Deiz 04:28, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

• Having fixed the copyvio (or more accurately having improved Schizombie's attempt to fix the copyvio) it's no longer a candidate for speedy. However, it does need cleanup up per the tags. But as long as it doesn't get any worse I'm outta here... Abstain. Deiz 13:12, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

• Keep per Green Giant. --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 05:14, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
• Strong and speedy delete per all reasons already stated. Plus the whole concept and context for the article (as well as the content) and just bad and tragically this user will never "get it". And trying to teach this person the actual purpose of wikipedia is fruitless. Just keep deleting, ignoring his pleading as attacks of bigotry and he (and his kind) will hopefully go away. MiracleMat 08:15, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

It is entirely possible to vote on a VfD and even to give a rationale without resorting to personal attacks. --Sneftel 09:16, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

• Delete An admirable attempt at filling in the article, but as it stands it's a confusing jumble. OhNoitsJamie^Talk 08:14, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

• Weak keep Also, I just added to the article, not noticing the copyright violation header contained a note not to make edits until after I made one - sorry. Schizombie 08:28, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
• Keep and rewrite. The article makes a decent case for its own notability, and distinguishes itself from Athletics in general. --Sneftel 09:13, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
• Keep with cleanup tag. has references, could make a decent article -- Astrokey44|talk 11:54, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
• Keep as per Green Giant. Bobby1011 12:18, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. No content has been added, just text (which is not the same thing). -- GWO 12:29, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
• Keep with clean-up tag -AKMask 00:06, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

• Comment I'm not sure what Striver is trying to achieve, but my comment about keeping the article and expanding it has resulted in Striver copying my comment to the article (see Islamic athletics#1900 CE) without bothering to rewrite it in an article format - it still has the words "so pretty much a Muslims-only athletic competition" at the end which was referring to the comment by BInguyen. Green Giant 00:58, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

I was just adding material in a panic, sorry if i offended you. --Striver 03:26, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

• Not offended, just you should rewrite it so it fits into the context of the article Green Giant 21:25, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

• Move to Athletics in Islam, then Keep. A sport can't be particularly Muslim any more than one could any other religion - what if a Jew plays a Muslim sport, is it still purely Islamic? zafiroblue05 | Talk 01:06, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes, i argue it does. As long as the sport is in accordance to the Sharia laws, it is Islamic, no matter who is practicing it. Just as food is halal, even if a Jew eats it.

• Keep and Move to Athletics in Islam or Athletics in Islamic doctrine or Athletics in Islamic history. The article needs reorganization and improvement, but the topic is encyclopedic in nature. MCB 02:09, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
• Keep I guess, but it certainly needs a lot of work and probably a different title. Sounds like the creator is motivated to fix the problems, so I say give him a shot at it and review in a while. Lots of apparent OR in there and it needs to be more specific about the ways in which Islam informs athletic endeavours. Some notable Islamic athletes in various disciplines would be good, too. Just zis Guy you know? 10:46, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Brief discussion

• Comment I have uppdated the article, it is now nothing like it was when the previous votes where cast. Please considere that i just made a hasty work, let it show that there is lots to add regarding athletics distinctly governed by Islam, and how it formed during the history of Islam. Also note that this article is a part of the Islamic studies --Striver 01:33, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

• I remain unconvinced. Somehow I think any topic could be protracted to appear more significant than it really is. The information you added to the article could easily be condensed into a single paragraph and, at best, be small section on another article. Note, also, that being linked from another page is not a reason to prevent deletion. In fact, I'm not even sure why it belongs in Islamic studies. Are athletics studies? joturner 02:07, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

The nominators comment "There really is no such thing as Islamic athletics, no specific relationship between Islam and athletics" really shows how little he knows about this topic. Just look at this: [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13].

Again i become upset at geting articles deleted due to not knowing enough about the subject --Striver 01:55, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

• I apologize if I am not educated enough about a topic. When an article sits unattended for two and a half months and when it pertains to something I believe I should have some knowledge of (in this case Islam), I have no choice but to come to the reasonable conclusion that there really is nothing noteworthy about the topic. But Striver, you also should not take offense at a request for deletion. It simply offers a chance to discuss the merit of an article. You, however, seem to be defensive whenever this arises. Given that Islam is considered a dīn (way of life) rather than a simple religion, we could connect Islam with practically any topic. But we don't need an article about Islamic shopping, Islamic space travel, and Islamic web-surfing just because some (trivial) relationship exists between Islam and those respective subjects. joturner 02:07, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Commment made by me moved to my talk page --Striver 02:40, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

I know everyone is going to get annoyed by this. Everyone... protracted AfDs are not my intention. I have added several AfDs and don't continue discussions unless absolutely necessary. I will respond to comments irrelevant to this AfD on Striver's talk page. joturner 02:29, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Are athletics studies?. Bro Did you read the fatwa section? Did you read the article i added? Did you read about how athletics got formed in the historical Islamic world? Sure you can say that in two sentances. If needed, i can say the whole Islam article in two sentances. But we are not here to delet, we are here to add, to create. Remember?--Striver 02:40, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Man, im going to sleep. But i urge you again: Go make yourself usefull, go google and EXPAND articles, not AFD them since you are are not sure if they can be expanded. Why do you think we have Template:--islam-stub--? --Striver 02:53, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

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.