Talk:List of former Baháʼís

Problems
problems with blogs and self-published sources abound…. --Smkolins (talk) 21:15, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
 * The blogs and self-published sources fall under self-source WP:SELFSOURCE. A35821361 (talk)
 * That's only true if there is enough third-party sources that make the subject notable enough, that is in an article about that subject, and that most of the content about the subject is not sourced with blogs. That is mostly not true here.   Regards, Jeff3000 (talk) 02:06, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
 * In my reading of other lists pages it is not standard to give each person a paragraph about what they did. Just a line about who they are. --Smkolins (talk) 11:56, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
 * See Wikipedia:Stand-alone lists, which leads to * Annotated lists, such as List of business theorists, and List of bicycle manufacturing companies which clearly just have a basic fact about the entry.--Smkolins (talk) 13:07, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
 * This draft started out as a pretty big OR project. It will need several revisions to reach perfection. Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 23:44, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Agreed. --Smkolins (talk) 01:38, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Personal Defamation
Some former Baha'is are labeled here as "apostates" while others are not. Considering the dark connotations the word carries in Baha'i literature, perhaps the editors of this page should think twice before labelling individuals with a derogatory term that is often tied to enemies of the Baha'i Faith. If any of these individuals has been officially marked as "apostate" by the Baha'i authorities, perhaps there might be technical grounds for labelling them as such, but I don't think a disparaging article posted long ago by a Baha'i individual (Moojan Momen) constitutes such grounds. Kaweah (talk) 19:12, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Moojan Momen used the term "apostate" in its sociological sense not in its religious sense. If the word "apostate" is to be used, it should at least be made clear which meaning applies. - Steve Marshall 218.101.105.60 (talk) 05:44, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Just a little aside: If anyone here should be defamed as a Momen-Apostate, it is the esteemed Dr. Cole (labeled on this page as a mere "former Baha'i")

'He has gone on to an apostate career including the setting up of a website in which there is much material attacking the Bahá'í community and the publication of three papers in academic journals expanding on his views. In all three of these papers, Cole's prime aim seems to be to find ways of portraying the Bahá'í community as the sort of "cult" demonised in the 1970-80s.' —Moojan Momen, "Marginality and Apostasy in the Bahá'í Community" Kaweah (talk) 13:26, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Ehsan Yarshater
As the letter from Ahmad Ashraf, the Managing Editor, makes clear "The truth is that while the chief editor of the Encyclopaedia, Professor Ehsan Yarshater, was raised in a Baha’i family, he has had no affiliation with the organization of the faith as an adult." By any sociological definition of religious affiliation, Ehsan Yarshater, having been raised in a Baha’i family, was a Baha’i. Many individuals who are raised in households professing a particular religion do not adhere to those religious beliefs as adults and therefore do not undergo ritualistic declarations. The Baha’i declaration of belief at age 15 is akin to credobaptism that exists in many Christian denominations. Regards, A35821361 (talk) 13:35, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Selection criteria
Reading over the three typical selection criteria, there is only one that applies to this case. Per Stand-alone lists:

"Every entry meets the notability criteria for its own non-redirect article in the English Wikipedia. Red-linked entries are acceptable if the entry is verifiably a member of the listed group, and it is reasonable to expect an article could be forthcoming in the future. This standard prevents Wikipedia from becoming an indiscriminate list, and prevents individual lists from being too large to be useful to readers."

As this list could be potentially very large (my sister is included on this list), the guideline says: "Selection criteria (also known as inclusion criteria or membership criteria) should be unambiguous, objective, and supported by reliable sources." So the list should include people who pass the notability test for their own article. If they are cited with a reliable source and have a reasonable chance of getting their own article, then I agree they should be included. People who were removed from membership but still believe they are Baha'is should not be included. Cuñado ☼ - Talk  23:33, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't think NN entries should be included, per WP:WTAF and WP:LISTBIO. If the article was an actual article about former Bahá'ís, WP:NLISTITEM would allow inclusion. But since this is a "List of..." then each entry has to be notable. Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 23:47, 15 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Regarding the accusation that I destroyed the page by removing details, this page is a list and each entry should have a very brief description for context. See List of former Muslims for an example. I removed non-notable individuals and people who still consider themselves a Baha'i. I also reduced the details to make it look more like a normal list. Each entry has its own page with details of the individual. Cuñado ☼ - Talk  18:20, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Smkolins (talk) 19:54, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Covenant-breaking is determined by the Administrative Order, not the "community"
Covenant-breakers are declared as such by the hierarchical apparatus of the Bahá'í Administrative Order, not by the "community". Regards, A35821361 (talk) 12:19, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
 * That there is a procedural process does not remove it from the realm of the "community" who also has to uphold the results of their own administrative process. Smkolins (talk) 14:40, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Others
The whole 'Others' section seems a bit off to me. Does the excommunication from the Baha'i community automatically make you an ex-Baha'i? Did not these persons see themselves as Baha'is? --2001:16B8:2C35:D500:2024:A011:A858:5BB (talk) 16:35, 9 June 2018 (UTC)


 * In most cases yes, people who were excommunicated usually lost their identity as a Baha'i or failed to form any kind of cohesive group outside of the main line of leadership. In this case, it looks like Ahmad Sohrab kept his Baha'i identity til he died, so you're right about that one. With Chanler it's not clear. Cuñado ☼ - Talk  04:36, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Adding Niku and Subhi
I had added Niku and Subhi's names beneath Abd-ol Husayn Ayati's name with links to Adib Taherzadeh's book. This is a reliable source and Niku and Subhi were both prominent Baha'is. Honestly, they should also get their own pages. Cuñado, I am quoting you below:


 * "If they are cited with a reliable source and have a reasonable chance of getting their own article, then I agree they should be included." (Ref. Selection criteria)

These two cases fit the above criteria so their names should appear on this page. Thanks. Serv181920 (talk) 07:16, 22 September 2020 (UTC)


 * The policy being quoted says that notability could be met if "it is reasonable to expect an article could be forthcoming in the future". I'm not familiar with these two individuals, and being mentioned in a book does not confer notability for their own articles. I honestly don't care just make articles for them that survive AFD and add them to the list. Generally speaking, I don't think they would pass notability. Cuñado ☼ - Talk  05:32, 23 September 2020 (UTC)


 * I am reversing your undo on the following grounds - 1) Niku was a prominent Baha'i and a friend of former Baha'i, Abd-ol Husayn Ayati AKA Avarih. Baha'i Scholars William Faizi McCants and Kavian Milani in their article "The history and provenance of an early manuscript of the Nuqtat al-kaf dated 1268 (1851–52)" published in the journal "Iranian Studies, 37:3, 431-449" have written about him as under:
 * "The book which Professor Browne published was taken from the manuscript in Paris. Aqa Ayati Avarih and Aqa Niku compared this manuscript with Professor Browne’s manuscript and found that they agreed perfectly. Perhaps these are the only hand-written manuscripts (of this book) in the world; first this one, and then the Paris manuscript. For this reason this manuscript is very authentic. I secured it with great difficulty." (Source : https://www.jstor.org/stable/4311649)
 * After recanting, Hajj Mirza Hasan, "Niku" wrote a book against the Baha'i Faith. Former Baha'i, Prof. Juan Cole, has this book uploaded on his academic page, here : https://www.h-net.org/~bahai/index/diglib/arapub.htm - He has also included Niku's book in his list of "Shaykhi, Babi and Baha'i Research Materials", here : http://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bhbiblio.htm
 * 2) Fadhl'u'llah Muhtadi Subhi (Sobhi), is also a prominent former Baha'i. He was a secretary of 'Abdul Baha. Check this link : https://www.abdulbahasfamily.org/photos/ - He has a Persian Wikipedia page in his name here : https://fa.wikipedia.org/wiki/فضل%E2%80%8Cالله_مهتدی_صبحی, there is also an article about him in "Encyclopedia Iranica", here : https://iranicaonline.org/articles/sobhi-fazl-allah-mohtadi - After leaving the Baha'i Faith, he also wrote a book against the Baha'i Faith.
 * These persons deserve to be in the list. Don't reverse my undo. Serv181920 (talk) 07:11, 23 September 2020 (UTC)


 * If they are notable enough for an article, then create articles for them. If they survive AFD, then they will go on the list. Very simple. Cuñado ☼ - Talk  06:17, 25 September 2020 (UTC)


 * What is the sense of writing this in "Selection criteria"? I am quoting you:
 * "If they are cited with a reliable source and have a reasonable chance of getting their own article, then I agree they should be included."Serv181920 (talk) 09:08, 25 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Sorry if I wasn't clear. See WP:LISTPEOPLE for the Wikipedia guidelines on lists of people. It says that, with some exceptions, inclusion in lists like this page require passing notability requirements, and also that their membership in the list is established by reliable sources. The notability requirements, in a nutshell, say that the person must have received "significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject".
 * And yes I said that if someone has a reasonable chance of getting an article, then they can be included. I have not seen any indication that the two individuals we're discussing have a reasonable chance of passing notability requirements. Cuñado ☼ - Talk  06:03, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Honestly, don't you think that having an article on Persian Wikipedia, his mention in Baha'i books and magazines, his service to 'Abdu'l Baha as a secretary for 2 years, his writing books against the Baha'i Faith makes him (Sobhi) notable?Serv181920 (talk) 07:14, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Honestly, no. There are potentially thousands of people who could go on this list. My sister could go on this list. There is a clear threshold for inclusion, and it is used across all of Wikipedia. Being mentioned in a book does not confer notability. Being around Abdu'l-Baha does not confer notability. Having a Wikipedia article in another language doesn't confer notability. According to WP:RS: "Wikipedia employs no systematic mechanism for fact checking or accuracy. Thus, Wikipedia articles (and Wikipedia mirrors) in themselves are not reliable sources for any purpose." Cuñado ☼ - Talk  15:43, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

"Covenant-breakers are not ex-Baha'is"
You have undone my edit stating that "covenant-breakers are not ex-baha'is". Please let me know who they are? Why there are names of the people from Baha'u'llah's family? There is no mention in the lead paragraph about the Covenant-breakers!Serv181920 (talk) 06:49, 29 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Excellent point! Some of Baha'u'llah's family lived the rest of their lives thinking of themselves as Baha'is, so it would be unfair to put them on this list, but the majority of that family lost their identity as Baha'is and today live as secular or Muslim Israelis. That is documented by Momen and others. Ruth White I believe never renounced her belief as a Baha'i, but simply opposed the leadership of Shoghi Effendi and was expelled. Juan Cole I believe no longer identifies as Baha'i, so could be on this list. Cuñado ☼ - Talk  06:53, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
 * "Ruth White I believe never renounced her belief as a Baha'i", do you have a proof/source for your belief? There is a proof that she was expelled from the Baha'i community.Serv181920 (talk) 07:13, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
 * If someone is expelled or declared a Covenant-breaker, but they continue calling themself a Baha'i, then they should not be included on this list. Wikipedia can't substantiate the expulsion and consider them not a Baha'i. In the case of Ruth White, I've never read that she renounced her Faith. If you think she converted away to something else, then provide a reference for that and add her to the list. <b style="color:#AF7817">Cuñado</b> ☼ - Talk  17:42, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Can we add reddit exBahai community link in "see also" section?
I am not sure of the policy of putting reddit community links in "See also" section. Can we add the community link if it is published in a secondary source?Serv181920 (talk) 12:43, 21 March 2021 (UTC)


 * External links/Perennial websites. <b style="color:#AF7817">Cuñado</b> ☼ - Talk  15:45, 21 March 2021 (UTC)