Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kaafirphobia

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete. There are a load of votes from anonymous users and entirely new users, some whose first edit is to this very VFD debate. Although such votes are not automatically discounted, I suspect that this is an attack of sockpuppetry, thererfore in this case these votes have been discounted without mercy. What is left is a clear consensus to delete the article. Sjakkalle (Check!)  13:25, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

Kaafirphobia
Non-notable neologism that gets 3 google hits from the same blog. Any relevant information about views toward Kafirs should be in the Kafir article, not here.Heraclius 15:50, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
 * DeleteHeraclius 15:51, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Also, I'd like to point out that this article was made in opposition to Islamophobia, which is also a neologism. There is a huge difference between the two, however.  Islamophobia has been defined by a number of respected authors (both pro and anti-Muslim) such as Said, Safi, Esposito, Ye'or, Robert Spencer, and Ibn Warraq.


 * Delete indeed the entry acknowledges it's a neologism.  15:59, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete obvious neologism -Soltak 16:20, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as per above. Hamster Sandwich 16:49, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep I feel Heraclius definition of respected authors is vague because Dr Colin Chee could be considered a respected author too. Also, what is wrong with this neologism? Is it not accurately mentioning that a Muslim can hate a non-Muslim? Garywbush 17:39, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep (Vote made by anon IP) A viable description of the ugly face that racism can take. 22:48, 4 August 2005 (GMT)
 * Delete Revolución 23:12, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Neologism. --Carnildo 23:38, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep (*User has less than ten edits). Useful new word Bmcgin 03:12, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment [Author:TCross, 09:19, 5 August 2005 (UTC)] This word is obviously NewSpeak (George Orwell, "1984"). The purpose of Newspeak according to Orwell: Compress a thought down to a few syllables so that the mind glosses over and accepts the embedded concept without careful consideration.  In this case, the inventor of the word is attempting to implant the idea in the public mind that some Muslims hate non-Muslims, and that hatred is a kind of hatred similar to Islamophobia.  Certainly the author of the article may state that idea anywhere and everywhere he likes as often and as loud as he wishes.  But the Western world has known about Muslims for a thousand years, and we should ask two questions 1) How have we got along until today without a word like this?  2) Now that we are making war on the Muslims, why do we suddenly discover a need for this word?  Here is my answer to these questions:  In this entry is the authors define the word as a form of racism that is not between races.
 * Keep (Vote made by Anon ip). It seems to me that this is a useful word to define the concept of hatred which is clearly visible in the behaviours of extremists within the islamic faith. The existence of this page here does not imply that all Muslims hate non-muslims, but the existence of this word is useful when needing to refer to those who do hate non-muslims and it is good to be clear that this is about a sub-section of the faith, not all members of the faith.  Muslim organisations in the UK condemn the actions of those who we could now say are "suffering from Kaafirphobia".  Does the definition state that all muslims hate non-muslims?  I do not think so.  If we are clear about the definition I see no reason for deletion. 86.133.173.24 06:44, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Might I be right in coining a neologism for "hatred of non-Christians by Christians"? Because if this article is kept, that is EXACTLY what I'll do. Revolución 17:18, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Revolución, yes please go ahead and create your own neologism for "hatred of non-Christians by Christians" because we already have neologisms like Christianophobia, Islamophobia, Anti-Semitism, and Kaafirphobia in Wikipedia. You have my support.  Here in Malaysia, Kaafirphobia is a word commonly used in colloquial speech as all non-Muslims, irrespective of religion are commonly lumped together as one category, Kaafirs by Muslims. Sam@mysite.com.my 08:23, 6 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep (Vote made by anon IP). (Its a useful word that is the reverse of Islamophobia and is used in regular speech here in Malaysia, where there are two categories of people, first is the Muslims, and second is the non-Muslims who are treated as inferiors, irrespective of their religion) 219.95.180.120 18:45, 6 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep (User has less than 50 edits). I support its inclusion in Wikipedia as this word has prior use, which can be proven through a search at Google and also on various other blogs, such as Minishorts . Also, it accurately describes hatred of non-Muslims by radical Islamists who are usually condemned by moderate Muslims. Rajanr imposter 07:13, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Please, various blogs? you stated just one and even that, the word kaafirphobia came up in the comment section.__earth 12:50, August 8, 2005 (UTC)
 * I cannot speak for Rajanr [since renamed "Rajanr imposter"] but are not entries in Wikipedia based on common use? Even the terms such as Islamophobia and Christianophobia were developed by common use. So, I do not see anything wrong with the poster who said the word kaafirphobia came up in the comment section of a blog for this is how a word gets created. Sam@mysite.com.my 02:53, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Kafir and make a subsection of Kaafirphobia there. The term has no widespread use and a google search gives merely 3 results - 2 from a blog and 1 from wikipedia itself __earth 12:47, August 8, 2005 (UTC)
 * Let me add that your claim that a google search gives only 3 results is inaccurate for you searched Google Web only and not Google Groups, which gives an additional 1 result. And if we take this third web site, minishorts.net it also has the word kaafirphobia in it except it is not displayed in Google Web or Google Groups. So, I believe this article should be retained as there are 4 known usages but there are surely other usages on local Malaysian e-communities not connected to the Internet. This term was invented by a Malaysian sociologist, Dr Colin Chee. What is your opinion, Earth? Sam@mysite.com.my 16:12, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep (I vote to keep this neologism as a search on Google, both Groups and Web render 4 results, and a search on minishorts.net render 3 results. I am sure there are other web sites that use this term, which was originated from Malaysian sociologist, Dr Colin Chee. There is justification for this neologism as Wikipedia has allowed Christianophobia and Islamophobia. Christianophobia itself is not used frequently at all yet it is in the Wikipedia data base. So, Kaafirphobia has the right to be in the data base too as it is mainly intended to be used by sociologists for hatred against non-Muslims by radical Islamist groups like Al-Qaeda that justifies Kaafir inferiority and Muslim supremacy, which is a form of racism.) DanianCheong 17:18, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect as per earth's suggestion. Not notable enough to merit its own article, but is a term in use in limited circles, and so deserves a mention in kaafir. Johnleemk | Talk 09:50, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep - A search on various web sites gives 12 results, i.e. Google(5), minishorts.net(3) and rajanr.com(4) so it is quite notable to merit its own article. I understand the purpose of Wikipedia is for already used terms and not original research. Since Kaafirphobia has been used already, it merits mention in kaafir as well as having its own article kaafirphobia. Sam@mysite.com.my 04:16, 12 August 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.