Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Muslim Christianity scholars(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 No consensus. —Quarl (talk) 2007-02-09 08:18Z 

List of Muslim Christianity scholars

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Clearly a POV topic. We don't have a List of Christian Islamic scholars. It also violates Listcruft (because there isn't an article on this topic). Sefringle 20:32, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak delete. Probably not useful as a list --⁪froth T 21:01, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment There is however, have an article on Islamic Christianity studies, which is the field in which these scholars are engaged. That article describes its subject as and attempt to "study Christian religious texts and religious traditions according to an Islamic view."  So the people on the list clearly have a point of view.  That does not mean that the list itself does, though.  Were there an analogous field of studying Islamic texts according to the Christian viewpoint, we could do an article (and possibly a list) on that topic.  However, it does seem that a category may be preferable here, as the list provides little beyond a collection of article links. JChap2007 03:18, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * We don't have a Christian Islamic scholars article, so having this article is POV pushing.--Sefringle 03:28, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * You're merely repeating the argument you made in the nomination, rather than responding to the distinction I made in my comment. If there is an established academic field in which Islamic texts are studied from a Christian perspective, we should have such an article.  JChap2007 04:08, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Categorize as Category:Muslim scholars of Christianity. JChap2007 is right, there's nothing wrong or POV about this list, it's just better suited to a category. — coe l acan t a lk  — 09:03, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Consitering that there are only 4 notable Christian Muslim Scholars, I'm not sure having a category is a good idea. It almost seems to be a waste to include a category to mention only 4 names.--Sefringle 23:05, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I've seen lesser-populated categories. The fact that there aren't many people with articles to put into the category is not an argument against the category. The argument for the category is that this is a distinct genre of writing that doesn't fit easily into other already-existing categories. The Category:Muslim scholars of Christianity category should be a subcategory of Category:Christian scholars, and it will nicely parallel the Category:Non-Muslim Islamic scholars. — coe l acan t a lk  — 03:12, 6 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Merge into Islamic Christianity studies. I don't see any POV problem at all. Appears to be a real existing phenomenon. Do also note that the relations that Christians have with Islam and Muslims has with Christianity are not identical. Muslims considers Jesus, Abraham, etc. as prophets and considers that the Bible and Torah were revelations that were distorted. Christians on the other hand, do not recognize neither Muhammad (saw) nor the Quran. --Soman 10:11, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * That't my understanding too. I don't think there's an analogous field. JChap2007 03:31, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. This topic is of extremely limited interest and this content is better off on a site for fans. Nardman1 02:21, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm pretty interested. Anyway, WP:IDONTLIKEIT is not an argument for deletion. — coe l acan t a lk  — 03:12, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
 * At the top of that page, it says it is an essay and not a guideline.--Sefringle 03:25, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
 * OK, so maybe you can cite the policy or guideline that supports deleting an article because an editor doesn't like it. JChap2007 03:31, 6 February 2007 (UTC)


 * keep "extremely limited interest"  amounts to IDONTLIKEIT and is not a criterion. It's an essay because its merely one of a great number of inappropriate reasons, so inappropriate  that it has not been necessary to make a guideline out of it, or any of the 100s of other other inappropriate reasons that have been offered from time to time.  As JChap says, find a case where limited interest was used as a criterion and supported by the consensus.  If there is real content, RN, V, and someone to write the article, that is enough. DGG 04:42, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
 * keep, valid topic, supports the Islamic Christianity studies article and contains no POV at the moment. Nuttah68 14:01, 6 February 2007 (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.