Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Former Muslims United (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Daniel (talk) 03:36, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Former Muslims United
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log )

No separate notability from Nonie Darwish. References to the organisation are only passing and lack WP:SIGCOV (like the the posting of the billboard) and most of the in depth coverage relates to Nonie Darwish. Hemiauchenia (talk) 05:54, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. Hemiauchenia (talk) 05:54, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Hemiauchenia (talk) 05:54, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I didn't realise this has previously been nominated for AfD. The discussion quality in the last AfD was poor, so I thought this was worth having again. Hemiauchenia (talk) 05:55, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:06, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

In conclusion, there appears to be very little significant coverage of this organisation by reliable sources. Hemiauchenia (talk) 21:45, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep This article discusses an important subject and is supported by about a dozen references. JRSpriggs (talk) 02:16, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete The lack of WP:SIGCOV indicates that, whatever the importance of the issues they organized around, they're not an organization worth devoting an article to. (Plenty of marginal and outright non-notable groups have formed with a mission statement about fighting illiteracy, world hunger, etc.) A redirect to Nonie Darwish wouldn't be out of the question (redirects are cheap), but I'm not sure how plausible a search term it is. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 17:54, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:SIGCOV and . I would add that extensive editing would need to be completed before this is an article, not a soap-box. IMHO, Washington Times is not areliable source, and since it is owned and managed indirectly by the Unification Church, it has a undisclosed conflict of interest. Bearian (talk) 17:00, 26 January 2021 (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.