Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Islamic views on anal sex


 * 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 redirect to Islamic sexual jurisprudence. ✗ plicit  12:12, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

Islamic views on anal sex

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

This article is oddly specific and unnatural for an encyclopedia. There are no reliable sources supporting its general notability (WP:GNG) in the sense of focusing on this subject as their principle topic in a way that in turn justifies it as an encyclopedic entry independent from the main article Islamic sexual jurisprudence (a.k.a.: Sexuality in Islam). Basically what we have is a collection of Islam blogs/Q&A websites. But Wikipedia is not an Islamic blog or Q&A website, and should not be mirroring such material unless it has significant coverage in reliable, secondary sources. On the contrary, not even a single reliable, secondary source is cited in this article. There is also some odd exceptionalism going on here. You will not find dedicated articles for anal sex in Judaism or Christianity (nor would I expect to). Wikipedia's main articles on religious proclivities towards sexuality (such as Sexuality in Judaism) are quite sufficient, and should remain so unless a very good case is made that the situation should be otherwise. Iskandar323 (talk) 09:03, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. Iskandar323 (talk) 09:03, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sexuality and gender and Islam. Shellwood (talk) 12:26, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Islamic sexual jurisprudence. Unnecessary WP:FORK stub with abysmal sourcing, WP:SYNTH and oddly specific topic. Dronebogus (talk) 13:02, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
 * to Islamic sexual jurisprudence. Poor sourcing in the article, and any reliable sources that are found could be added to the jurisprudence article. Firefangledfeathers (talk | contribs) 02:40, 8 April 2022 (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.