Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Muslim politicians
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 keep. Ifnord 01:46, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Muslim politicians
This is one of the few times when I think that a category would serve a better purpose than a list. User:Zoe|(talk) 03:51, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
- Delete Agreed. --InShaneee 03:52, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
- Delete Absolutely. Coincidentally, I just nominated Muslim athletes for deletion for the same reason. joturner 04:11, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
- Keep a list can have more information than a category. Fix the list to be more inforamtive, dont delet it. Also, half the article is NOT a list, its a description Muslim politicians, and that can definitly not be included in a category. Im gona spice up the list so that your single objection will be voided. --Striver 04:12, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
- Categorize and delete - The stuff in the article isn't very encyclopedic, eg, discussing the status of Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Laden, and the rest is just a dic-def.Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 04:17, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
commentWhats up with the deletion frenzy? Guys, we all know that categories are great, but they have their weaknesses. They cant included extra info, like birth date and field of proffesion, something that a article can do. I mean, take a look at Islamic scholars. A category will never achiev that kind of information. Further, why dont you go and delet and categories all other article here: list of lists. This is totaly unfair, why dont you take a grab att List of jews as well? --Striver 04:35, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
- Keep The relationship of a potitician to his or her Islamic faith is potentially much more significant then is the case with most other religions. There are historical and religious reasons this would be so. A category could not deal with that effectively as it can be rather complicated. It is also of interest as a starting point for history people. I took a class on Radical Islam, but it also dealt with modernist and liberal variants, and a list like this could've been a valuable starting point.--T. Anthony 06:10, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
- Keep - and expand, make note of western muslims, which is impotant when dealing in the English Language. --Irishpunktom\talk 09:46, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
- Keep - I see no difference between this list and for instance List of Catholic leaders and politicians // Liftarn 14:30, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
- Strong Keep per Liftarn. --Siva1979Talk to me 17:03, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
- Keep - List is better. i agree with Striver's comment --Yahussain 18:47, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
- Categorize - I don't often agree with Zoe, but this is one time where she's right on the money. This would make an excellent category, but is more of a list rather than an article, there isn't any meat in this right now and it's doubtful that there'd be enough that couldn't be done in a list anyway, so also a weak rename to List of Muslim leaders and politicians, to standardize with List of Catholic leaders and politicians, but make figure in there is added to the new category. Karmafist 18:53, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
- Keep - agree with User:Striver (who may be interested to know that people often do "take a grab" at List of Jews). Udzu 18:55, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
- Keep per Striver. KI 22:04, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
- Keepper all above AND categorise. Lists and categories are both useful in different ways. Jcuk 22:17, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
- Keep.--Zereshk 20:42, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
- Keep, but rename to List of Muslim leaders and politicians. NoIdeaNick 22:00, 25 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.