Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeffrey Lang


 * 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. arguments that play the nominator and not the article have been discarded. Arguments that assert notability through generalities and assertions have been given much less weight the those providing analysis of the available sourcing. There maybe a case for notability per Шизомби but there was no indication of the depth of coverage and this remains a BLP with inadequate sourcing at the time of closing. Spartaz Humbug! 03:12, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Jeffrey Lang

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Notability Dust diamond (talk) 18:48, 19 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete this man is no more notable than an average college professor. His books are never mentioned in major media. The only "sources" this article has are dead pages, obscure websites, and his own personal page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dust diamond (talk • contribs) 19:10, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  —John Z (talk) 19:20, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep: Due to possible bad faith made by the editor that made the AfD request. MajorMinorMark (talk) 21:59, 19 November 2009 (UTC) removed opinion of banned user. Bongo   matic  03:07, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
 * FYI. Previous comment is from a known, and now-indefinitely-blocked sock puppet. Respectfully, Agricola44 (talk) 17:48, 20 November 2009 (UTC).


 * What "bad faith" are you talking about? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dust diamond (talk • contribs) 22:03, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Most of the article simply recounts his conversion and devotion to Islam, with no claim of notability there. He is an academic mathematician, but investigation indicates he's had little impact. Specifically, WoS shows 10 papers with an h-index of only 3 using "Author=(lang j*) Refined by: Institutions=(UNIV KANSAS) AND Subject Areas=(MATHEMATICS OR MATHEMATICS, APPLIED) Timespan=All Years. Databases=SCI-EXPANDED, SSCI, A&HCI" (note the potential for false-positives because of the commonality of the name). MGP indicates he's never graduated any PhD students. These are not impressive stats for someone who's apparently been in academia for almost 3 decades. He is co-author of a book on Ziriski surfaces (with his advisor), which WorldCat shows about 200 libraries holding – not too bad for a monograph, but far from outstanding. (His books on Islam are all less widely held.) FYI: The link that sells his CDs on Islam seems to work, but many others are broke, as Dust diamond notes. Respectfully, Agricola44 (talk) 22:30, 19 November 2009 (UTC).
 * Delete. I tried looking for a sign that he might pass WP:PROF #1 when this article was prodded but I was unsuccessful at finding one — I came to basically the same conclusions as Agricola44. So he appears not to pass WP:PROF and I don't see any convincing evidence that his religious work passes WP:GNG. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:13, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Yet another BLP without an RS in sight! --Paularblaster (talk) 01:59, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. In addition to what Agricola and David Eppstein wrote, I did a MathSciNet search. Lang has 25 publication listed there, with a grand total of 9 citations. That is rather thin for a research mathematician. Does not pass WP:PROF. There is some info in the article about his activism on religious matters, but no evidence of significant coverage to pass WP:BIO on those grounds. Nsk92 (talk) 02:08, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Change to Keep. GoogleNews does show that there is a fairly significant newscoverage of Lang's religious activism. I think there is enough there to pass WP:BIO. Nsk92 (talk) 12:21, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. Established above that he does not pass WP:Prof but he appears to have some sort of (controversial) presence in the U.S. Islamic community. Can others say if that is notable? Xxanthippe (talk) 06:48, 20 November 2009 (UTC).
 * Keep. Lang's notability doesn't lie in the fact that he's a Muslim convert or an academic; it lies in his body of work, both as an author and as a public speaker on Islam. 218.186.12.231 (talk) 12:49, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Which works? Septentrionalis PMAnderson 15:04, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Agree with Septentrionalis's point. His books on Islam are certainly not widely held by libraries and they are clearly not best-sellers, i.e. they cannot claim to have had any real impact. An assertion of notability on the basis of public-speaking and commentating is more nebulous, but I should think that to qualify one would need to be regularly speaking in high-profile venues or lecture circuits, garnering coverage in national media (e.g. being quoted in major outlets), appear on syndicated talk shows, give University commencement addresses, or any other such activities that would differentiate oneself from the herd of other hopefuls that simply "preach to their own choirs". I concede there are a lot of GN hits, but many of these don't appear to qualify at anything close to the level I've just described. For example, the top hit is yet another recount of his conversion to Islam appearing in Reading Islam, which seems to be nothing more than an agenda-based website, i.e. not a WP:RS mainstream news outlet. In short, the public-speaking angle doesn't work either. Respectfully, Agricola44 (talk) 17:41, 20 November 2009 (UTC).
 * Keep on basis of unusual life path and Islamic activism, some of which appears to have generated opposition from conservative circles of the U.S. Islamic community. I note that the nominator of this AfD started editing on 19 November and has never edited outside this topic. Xxanthippe (talk) 02:12, 21 November 2009 (UTC).
 * Can you find some examples of conservative opposition to Mr. Lang? As far as I can tell, nobody cares. Also, the fact that I am new to Wikipedia does not mean Mr. Lang is a notable figure. Dust Diamond —Preceding undated comment added 19:11, 21 November 2009 (UTC).
 * A search for "Jeffrey Lang Islam" gives 74,000 Ghits. I have not read them all, of course, but [one] says "We stand by our opinion that the book by Jeffrey Lang is misleading and dangerous". In view of the unusual edit record of the nominator (he developed enough skill to create an AfD on his first day of editing) would he care to say if he has any WP:COI due to association with conservative Islamic interests that might be happy to muzzle this critic who writes "misleading and dangerous" books about Islam? Xxanthippe (talk) 02:55, 22 November 2009 (UTC).
 * The linked comment appears to be a followup to a review. I'm not sure how notable albalagh.net is; it's apparent it's a pretty conservative site and its URL and editor's name show up in a number of books.  Incidentally, since it was mentioned in this AfD: Articles_for_deletion/Mecca_Centric.  Шизомби (talk) 04:06, 22 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment The article cites two examples of Mr. Langs religious activism: his work for Mecca Centric and co-founding of Generation Islam. According to Alexa, Mecca Centric is not one of the top 100,000 websites. Generation Islam is no longer active, and there's no evidence that it was ever a significant movement. (Note that only information Google has only Generation Islam is the Wikipedia article. Perhaps that article should be deleted as well.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dust diamond (talk • contribs) 19:32, 21 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep Well-known and well-respected in the Muslim community for this writings and lectures.--LatinoMuslim 22:12, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Do you have any evidence that he is "well-known and well-respected"?--Dust diamond (talk) 22:36, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
 * 74,000 Ghits for starters. Xxanthippe (talk) 02:55, 22 November 2009 (UTC).


 * Comment Most probably he would fail the academic notability, however I suspect he is as notable within the American Muslim community, and perhaps worldwide Muslim community as is claimed. That might be hard to establish for those of us outside of Islam, without access to American Muslim and foreign publications; it would be advisable to worry about Systemic bias.  Does it make sense to ignore American muslims and who they're listening to, considering?  That said, there is a profile of him in The Columbia Sourcebook of Muslims in the United States (Columbia University Press, 2009) and an excerpt from one of his books (139-148), is quoted a few times in Daniel Pipes' Militant Islam Reaches America (as someone opposed to militant Islam) showing some degree of notability outside of the Muslim community.  I saw the entry for one of his books on Amazon said his books had been translated into other languages.  Not sure how to find out which books and which languages, though abebooks turned up a Turkish translation of one, Melekler de sorar Islam'i Amerika'da secmek.  A book review "Conversion to Islam: A Study of Native British Converts" by Ali Köse in Journal of the American Academy of Religion (Vol. 67, No. 1, Mar., 1999, 221) notes "there is a small but growing body of work on the Islamic communities of North America and Europe" and mentions one of Lang's books as an example of a more substantive examination of the role of converts in Islam. Шизомби (talk) 23:26, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Worldcat indicates Struggling to Surrender was translated into Arabic as al-Sira` min ajl al-iman : intiba`at Amriki i`tanaqa al-Islam and into Indonesian as Berjuang untuk berserah : menyegarkan pemahaman Islam and his Even Angels Ask into Arabic as Hatta al-malaikah tasal : rihlah ila al-islam fi Amrika. Perhaps a little "more notable than an average college professor"?  I'm curious as to how Dust Diamond found this article and managed to do an AfD on his first day at WP?  I found AfD to be a pain, myself, even after having edited here for a while.  Anyway, there's a book review of Struggling by Noakes, Greg. Middle East Journal, Spring95, Vol. 49 Issue 2, p354, 2p.  I'd have to ILL to get it.  Hartford Seminary's journal Muslim World (est. 1911, not on WP - more Systemic bias?) has "Conversion Out of Islam: A Study of Conversion Narratives of Former Muslims" By: Khalil, Mohammad Hassan, Bilici, Mucahit, Jan2007, Vol. 97, Issue 1 which includes Lang's Losing My Religion as one of the "best-publicized -- and presumably most influential" print sources on the subject of conversion out of Islam, a book the authors say "documents some of the letters and email messages that he received from American Muslims and former Muslims."  Both journals are Peer-reviewed.  In light of these things and Nsk92's Google findings above, I would tend to support a keep here, although I'd support a delete for Generation Islam. Шизомби (talk) 02:03, 22 November 2009 (UTC)


 * I found this article while looking at the converts from atheism page. Of course, this is not the first time I've been on Wikipedia, but after seeing this page I decided to make an account and NFD. At any rate, I'm impressed with your research. Good stuff. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.124.110.111 (talk) 04:55, 22 November 2009 (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.