Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Faith in the Bahá'í Faith


 * 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 no consensus to delete, default to keep.  It's never been made very clear which article this is supposed to be a content fork of. Inappropriate spinouts can be merged back without an AfD.  Sandstein  07:07, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Faith in the Bahá&

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This article appears to repeat information in the existing articles relating to Baha'i. Ecoleetage (talk) 01:17, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. An unneeded content fork for Bahá'í Faith. Nsk92 (talk) 03:48, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Cuñado  ☼ -  Talk  04:56, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * You have made a number of contribution to the Bahai articles. I'd be interested in the reasoning behind your delete.  Are there any other sub-articles you think should be deleted?  Geo Swan (talk) 23:38, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * The more I edit the more conservative I am with making new pages. I think too many spur off articles about the Baha'i Faith is a bad thing, so I would only support pages that are obviously relevant and well sourced. Most new editors (including me a few years ago) like to make new articles that are stubs, and create lots of new links. I think the role of faith in this religion is not significant, the way it has been emphasized in Christianity to the point that my friends tell me if you believe in Jesus and read a verse you'll go to heaven no matter what else you do. So while it makes sense to have Christian articles about faith, it is not emphasized enough in this religion to warrant its own page. In other words, it's not a core belief of the Baha'i Faith, so I would prefer to just leave it as a short summary on a different page. Cuñado  ☼ -  Talk  14:35, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * That may be your taste but I'm not aware of any policy in Wikipedia that articles on religions should only be about core beleifs, let alone debating and deciding and citing what a core beleif is or is not.--Smkolins (talk) 22:07, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong delete - Gratuitous content fork.  a s e nine  say what?  06:25, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete - Redundant title. Alexius08 is welcome to talk about his contributions. 06:28, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Not true. The word "faith" is used in two different senses. Borock (talk) 13:57, 12 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete per Nsk92. JuJube (talk) 06:44, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep T0lk (talk) 07:21, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * How about a reason? JuJube (talk) 07:51, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * There are similar articles about other religions and the existing article is quite long and only needs to be edited to conform to wikipedia's standards. T0lk (talk) 17:43, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - after a Merge into Bahá'í Faith if there's anything worthy of merging. Merenta (talk) 13:05, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep This is a worthwhile topic. The article is well sourced as well. I am sure that WP has articles on faith from the point of view of Christianity and other major religions. Why not one on the Baha'i view of the topic? Borock (talk) 13:57, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * It might be possible to merge with Faith. Borock (talk) 14:55, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I see that Faith already has a section on the Baha'i view which refers readers to this article for more info. Borock (talk) 15:34, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * As I stated above, I think the article is a WP:content fork for Bahá'í Faith which already deals with the subject to a substantial degree. It might be appropriate to extend the Beliefs section of Bahá'í Faith and put some extra material there. But as things stand now, this article appears to be a clear content fork, whose very title is a bit of a tautology. Nsk92 (talk) 18:01, 12 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions.   —Aleta  Sing  16:06, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as a fork.--Berig (talk) 18:25, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * strong delete "faith in the baha'i faith" is a silly tautology. Merkin's mum 18:39, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * strong keepAs the original starter of the page obviously I feel it has a place. Many of the reasons I felt the need for the page have been outlined above. I'm certainly open to addressing the weaknesses mentioned - I do feel the title is awkward but it was the best I could do at the time. Understanding the senses of the word "Faith" would clarify if it was a fork "the same subject" which it really is not. There is the religion, and there is the aspect of having faith, per the religion.--Smkolins (talk) 23:20, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Although the word "faith" is used twice in the title it is in different ways simply because "Baha'iism" is not commonly used (and seems to sometimes be pejorative). We have Faith in Christianity, Jewish principles of faith, Iman (Islamic concept of faith), and perhaps others (such as in part Sikhism primary beliefs and principles). This article can be better referenced, but it seems like other major religions already have expanded treatments. --Dhartung | Talk 23:33, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, tautology/fork/etc. Stifle (talk) 20:05, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Keep -- A couple of things I noticed...
 * This article was created in October 2006. Which, I think, means no one should move to delete it because they think it is a  recent content fork;
 * In order to know if this is a tautology I think we need to know something about the Bahai. I don't.  So I looked at the talk page, to see if the contributors to the Bahai article had any concerns about this article
 * The main article is already 63K bytes long. The main Bahá'í Faith article refers readers to literally dozens of sub-articles, including: God in the Bahá'í Faith, Bahá'í Faith and the unity of religion, Bahá'í Faith and the unity of humanity, Bahá'í statistics, Bahá'í teachings, Covenant of Bahá'u'lláh, Bahá'í history, Báb, Bahá'u'lláh, Bahá'í administration, Bahá'í study circle, Bahá'í laws, Bahá'í House of Worship, Bahá'í marriage.  Are those voicing delete opinions going to force those who maintain the main Bahá'í Faith article to go to the considerable effort of integrating the material in those articles into the main article.  I certainly hope not.  Note: 63K is already too big.  Merging all the sub-articles might double the size of the main article.  Geo Swan (talk) 23:31, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - but drastically rewrite!. The tautology argument is nonsense. The word "Faith" as in "Baha'i Faith" has nothing to do with "faith" as a theological/ethical concept - it is very simply a synonym for "religion". If the Baha'i Faith were called the "Baha'i Religion" (as it might have been) then there would very obviously be no tautology. Two words spelled and pronounced the same, but they're totally different words. Got that? Put it another way - if there is a tautology in "Faith in the Baha'i Faith" - there is also an identical tautology in "Faith in Christianity". Having said that, I am unhappy with the article - and feel it has little value in its present form. The value of articles on particular theological constructs in different religions in an encyclopedia is not to repeat or "reinforce" information from the main article (all it does in its present form), so much as to help us understand a specific (in this case Baha'i) view of the subject of "faith" - common as it is to all religions. This article is a two pronged fork, if you like, the other prong being the concept of "Faith (theological concept)". And while it may historically have "forked" from the Baha'i Faith - the primary "prong" of the fork is actually "faith" itself. --Soundofmusicals (talk) 16:12, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep and expand/develop
 * The article is clearly not a tautology.
 * Neither is it a content fork. Article spinouts are normal.
 * GeoSwan's observations are quite apropos,
 * as are Soundofmusicals. MARussellPESE (talk) 23:25, 14 May 2008 (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.