Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Economic jihad


 * 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 was   delete. JohnCD (talk) 17:37, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Economic jihad

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No real sources for this (Sookhdeo is a polemicist, not a scholar), article created by blocked sock of SPA account. Topic appears non-notable, absent sources that discuss it (WP:GNG/WP:NOR), but at best, even if it is actually notable, it would benefit from a ground-up creation by someone who knows how to edit WP (WP:TNT). A less formal way of saying all of this would be that this is laughable POV rubbish the inclusion of which makes Wikipedia look foolish. –Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 16:44, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  czar   &middot;   &middot;  17:09, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions.  czar   &middot;   &middot;  17:10, 8 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete. The title is an attack on Islamic financial initiatives. Any published sources discussing such initiatives as jihad should be in other articles, not this one. This title should not even be a redirect. Binksternet (talk) 17:14, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete Not neutral.  Appears to be an attack page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robert McClenon (talk • contribs) 16:48, May 8, 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. Duplicates content at Islamic banking in a remarkably biased fashion. Gobōnobō  + c 18:24, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:FORK and WP:SOAP. Unnecessarily duplicative.  Shariah-compliant investing is the same as Islamic banking.  Will change the redirect. Bearian (talk) 21:21, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
 * There also is an article at Sharia investments, which may have to be merged as well. Bearian (talk) 21:24, 13 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete. Aside from attakc page issues, it's just original research of one individual who isn't notable in the field themself. MezzoMezzo (talk) 04:02, 14 May 2013 (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.