Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of people who left Islam


 * 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 to delete. W.marsh 14:57, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

List of people who left Islam


Unmaintainable lists of questionable encyclopedic value as lists. Would be better served as categories; fortunately, those categories already exist, making the lists redundant. Shimeru 08:38, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Also nominating the following: Shimeru 08:39, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * List of converts to Islam
 * List of converts to Christianity
 * List of converts to Judaism
 * List of converts to Hinduism

And: Shimeru 20:08, 5 November 2006 (UTC) Note: 13 votes made before these four were added to the Afd Bakaman Bakatalk 23:59, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * List of ex-atheists
 * List of ex-Protestants
 * Former Latter-day Saints
 * List of ex-Roman Catholics


 * Delete all per nominator. --Nlu (talk) 09:51, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete categories work just fine. Kavadi carrier 09:56, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Categories suffice here. utcursch | talk 10:27, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. MER-C 10:47, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as per above. -- Szvest 14:05, 5 November 2006 (UTC) Wiki me up ®
 * Delete as per WP:NOT TheRanger 14:07, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Do not replace lists with categories; see Categories, lists, and series boxes.  (For example, lists can include redlinks while categories cannot.  List entries can be annotated with, for example, the date and reason of conversion, whereas category entries cannot.  Lists can be watchlisted to track additions and deletions, but categories cannot.)  Note also that while some people may consider the lists for Islam and Christianity to be unmaintainable, the ones for Judaism and Hinduism certainly aren't.  Those are not proselytizing religions, and as such the number of converts is, and will remain, very small.  &mdash;Psychonaut 14:11, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep all. It was rather unwise to nominate these pages for Deletion. Lists are another way of categorizing people. The link given above by Psychonaut WP:CLS gives the advantages of keeping lists. Here you can categorize into different sections, tabulate information, provide pictures (like in List of converts to Christianity) and add additional features which you CANNOT do in Categories.
 * If this policy is acted upon, I will request the deletion of other lists as well such as List of Muslims, and its many Sub Lists which are linked on that page. If somehow List of Muslims page is also not deleted, I'll take this matter up to Arb Com. All policies must be applied equally. Also note the existence of List of people by belief. Either nominate ALL of these lists for Deletion (for consistency), or leave them alone. It is therefore ridiculous in my opinion to suggest the deletion of List of people who left Islam.--Matt57 14:56, 5 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Though not voting for deletion before reading the above, I must agree with Matt57's persuasive and compelling argument that these other lists should also be deleted, on the same grounds Shimeru gives above. Thus my vote below, and likewise (when nominated) there. -- SAJordan 20:04, 5 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep all Perfectly valid lists and there is such a thing as perfectly valid lists. Would you delete List of HIV-positive people because there is Category:HIV-positive people? Several of these lists have years of work put into them and contain annotation or notable red-linked names.--T. Anthony 15:39, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * That being said I'm not necessarily opposed to deleting the "lists by former religion." These are likely to be more contentious as it implies rejection of something. If this is what is wanted though those should've been nominated. Those lists are List of ex-atheists, List of ex-Protestants, Former Latter-day Saints, and List of ex-Roman Catholics.--T. Anthony 15:59, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * On consideration I have an alternate proposal. Keep the lists, but we should delete the categories. The lists are dealing with a subject that may require some explanation, but categories can be added without expanation and affect the article. Putting Category:Former Muslims, or anyone, can cause unnecessary problems to people that merely being on a list may not. This is because lists, ideally, require sources.--T. Anthony 16:16, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I disagree: the Categories provide an easy way for all the different articles to be linked together. When a person clicks on a category, they can either see others in the same category, or seek more information on the separate Lists page, which will be/should be linked on the Category pages. These are all different ways of displaying information. If a person doesnt belong in a category, they can always debate that and I have observed they have.--Matt57 16:32, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * You may have a point. Plus we're not voting on categories here so I basically stick with keeping all.--T. Anthony 01:36, 6 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment Thanks for bringing those to my attention; I've added them to the nomination. Shimeru 20:08, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * This is not what I had in mind. I was thinking more switch it to just be apostasy lists as those are more clearly contentious. Still if you're just going to keep adding things to this Afd I should mention that you missed List of Catholic converts.--T. Anthony 08:08, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment. I don't think categories are necessarily the best way to keep this information, but I think these articles have another problem other than the category vs. list maintenanbility issue: they're inherently POV and difficult to verify.  With that being the case, eventually, if the lists are deleted, perhaps the category should go next.  --Nlu (talk) 16:36, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Great, so you're suggesting the Deletion of all categories and lists on Wikipedia which could inherently be POV. People come on Wikipedia and debate their POV and they frequently arrive at conclusions which are based on facts and so we arrive at a NPOV. As far as "List Maintenanbility" is concerned, that is true for ANY page, not just lists. ALL pages have to be maintained. Thats the responsibility of the editors. Thats what we are HERE for.--Matt57 16:47, 5 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletions.  -- BhaiSaab talk 16:44, 5 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep All : very interesting and valid points raised by User:Psychonaut. --- ابراهيم 17:00, 5 November 2006 (UTC)


 * keep for all the reasons above. The lists are not inherently POV and unverifiable because people can only be added to them if they are referenced. If there is no proof, then they should not be added. Simple as. Dev920 (check out this proposal) 17:01, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Most of the entries on these lists are in fact not cited. Only List of converts to Christianity appears thoroughly sourced, and even there it appears that half the list or more is not. Shimeru 20:27, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Almost all or all of the names in the List of converts to Judaism mentioned conversion to Judaism in their articles. I took out only two or three because I couldn't find a reference for the article's claim they converted. Virtually all names in the list are now cited except for BC figures known by one name, looking them up is hard, and a porn star that I didn't want to Google.--T. Anthony 10:12, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
 * While they may not be cited, their articles should mention it. And if they don't they don't they should be googled. A lack of references does not in practice does not mean the lists should be deleted. Personally, I have been through every single one of those lists in the past few months to see who is on them, and have learnt many new thinsg taht i would not have learnt had I merely had categories to refer to. Dev920 (check out this proposal) 23:17, 5 November 2006 (UTC)


 * keep these lists are very interesting to people who see them, because they dont just tell the name, but other info about the person, which makes a person easier to find. In categories its just dull. Bazel 18:31, 5 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Strong keep all: All of these articles include notable people who already have articles on Wikipedia. They function as a good research tool. For example, let's say someone is trying to research people who had converted from Judaism to Christanity, or vice-versa. List of converts to Christianity and List of converts to Judaism would provide a great resource. The prospective researcher easily could find subjects to examine further. The other lists work the same way. These lists are wholly viewpoint neutral, and they provide a valuable research resource. Also, replacing them with categories is not a good idea, because categories cannot be placed on a watchlist, but these lists can. The lists are very well-developed and fit Wikipedia's purposes very well. Please keep them. 65.28.2.218 18:42, 5 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete per nominator. Bazel 19:31, 5 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Strong delete all per nominator and Matt57's argument above. -- SAJordan 20:04, 5 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Note also the direction indicated by User categorization: "In the past (and partially for now until the new system is entirely in place) user categorisation has been accomplished through hundreds of unsorted lists that are growing very large in some cases and are almost entirely unmanageable. The English Wikipedia is one of the few still using this defunct system. It has been proposed (and is currently being implemented) that these lists be replaced by a system of organised categories." – SAJordan talkcontribs 20:20, 9 Nov 2006 (UTC).


 * Comment: User Bazel above has voted both for Keep and Delete. I have notified him of that. Here's the interesting thing in this vote: Some people like seeing List of converts to Islam, however they have a major obvious problem with List of people who left Islam. Remember people, your vote will also apply to List of converts to Islam so be careful about what you ask for.--Matt57 20:19, 5 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep all - Its stupid to nominate so many pages at once. Its actually stupid. For Judaism and Hinduism, it would be easy to maintain, and a keep vote should be placed on Islam and Christianity for fairness as well. I dont know about ex-protestants, because prots are merely a sect.Bakaman Bakatalk 20:25, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Not at all. These are all lists of people who went from one religion (or none at all) to another (or none at all), so they're all related. Shimeru 20:35, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I also find it interesting that you stated on my talk page that you "would have voted delete had [I] not been so adventurous (or crossed into the Hinduism line)." I see no reason to show such partiality to any one specific religion; it seems to me that either these lists all belong, or they all don't.  Why do you feel Hinduism does not fit in with the others? Shimeru 21:04, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Reply - But the point is to a religion. List of people who left Islam is a left list not a to' list. Also verifiability, should be in the article, it doesnt have to be in the actual list. For example George Harrison 's article cites he converted to Hinduism. Its redundant to cite the same link in the list. Just because it has to be policed doesnt mean it can fall victim to a deletionist crusade. The Hinduism comment was showing why I'm fighting for a strong keep, because it affects me more personally when my religionis up for deletion. I would have voted delete had the afd been only for List of people who left Islam.Bakaman Bakatalk 21:07, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Of course it does, and I suspect that that, rather than the merits of the articles, is what will drive many of the keep votes. Nevertheless.  I still don't see a difference between 'from' and 'to'... if George Harrison converts to Hinduism, is he not also converting from a previous belief? Shimeru 21:20, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Reply Good point. If you read any of the lists you AFD'd you might see that each of those lists has a section "Fom ISlam", "From Buddhism", "From Christianity", "From Hinduism". The actual List of people who left Islam is therefore unneeded (and merits delete) but dragging the to lists into the same AFD nom messed up your case.Bakaman Bakatalk 21:30, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - Chopper Dave 20:37, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: I wonder why only lists for Conversion/Apostasy are being targeted. Are they any less important than a list like List of Muslims? Any answer to that, Shimeru? --Matt57 20:39, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Because lists of converts/apostates are all related to each other. Lists of people by religion would not be suitable for inclusion in the same AfD in my opinion.  Do not take my exclusion of those lists from this AfD as a statement that I feel those lists are or are not important; they simply are not relevant to this AfD as I see it. Shimeru 21:04, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * They ARE relevant. One is a list of "converting to", the other is "who are". Both are lists of people with a certain belief. Therefore if any reason of deletion applies to List of people who left Islam, it also applies to List of Muslims. --Matt57 22:02, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong delete and comment: Look at the list of Muslims. It links to a bunch of subcategories. But then look at one of the lists being considered for deletion, such as List of people who left Islam. It's just a list of names. I support List of Muslims, List of Christians, etc. but not the ones put up for deletion. -- Ķĩřβȳ ♥  Ťįɱé  Ø  20:51, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * List of people who left Islam is a new article. It has not been yet refined and categorized. The page was just created last night. Give it some time. The fact that a page is short or doesnt have sub-lists, is no criteria for Deletion. Are you also supporting deletion of List of converts to Islam? --Matt57 21:02, 5 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete (the article nominated, not the other "convert" lists). Per nom, and also because of duplication ... this article sort of duplicates the info in the other "converts to" lists. --Ragib 20:54, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * There is no duplication of information. If we have a list of List of converts to Islam, we can definitely have a list List of people who left Islam. These lists convery separate information anyway. This is why your vote will count for all such lists, including List of converts to Islam.--Matt57 20:58, 5 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep. I have helped with List of ex-Roman Catholics and it does not have a corresponding category. Carolynparrishfan 21:08, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I just created a Category:Former Roman Catholics, just in case, much to my own surprise.--T. Anthony 16:14, 6 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete All - serves no purpose. --Irishpunktom\talk 22:02, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletions.  Bakaman Bakatalk  21:13, 5 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep all, for reasons noted above. However, entries on these lists should be held to the same standards of verifiability and WP:BLP as any other article. -Porlob 22:07, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete all We have categories for a reason; they work perfectly fine here. --  tariq abjotu  23:14, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment As I say, at least one of the proposed does not have a corresponding category. Carolynparrishfan
 * Tariq, Categories serve their own purposes and so do lists. You can have additional information in lists that you cannot have in Categories. "Do not replace lists with categories; see Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and series boxes"--Matt57 23:26, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, I understand the purpose of lists, but I still believe categories would work fine here. --  tariq abjotu  23:57, 5 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletions.  --BhaiSaab talk 23:50, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, I think the list is sort of interesting. No reason to delete.  Elizmr 23:55, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep This is an attempt to create a new de facto policy through afd. If a new policy on redundant lists and categories is desired then the relevant guidelines should be followed. The current guideline says that lists and categories on the same topic are allowed. Also the size of the nomination and the addition of new articles to the nomination after votes have be made undermines the afd process. Seano1 00:01, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep- not everything is a category. These lists are very useful in writing about similar people. --Jayrav 00:06, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep all and comment Mass nominations of even remotely controversial subjects don't work out for anyone. Afd is not the place to argue the value of lists versus categories as policy and mass-nominating lists relating to all the world's major religions, to me, is dangerously close to violating WP:POINT.  Furthermore, adding additional articles to the nom after other editors had voted is seriously out of order.  I suggest this Afd by closed as "trainwreck -- no consensus" and mass nominations of this sort be discouraged in the future. Dina 01:05, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep All per Seano1  Doctor Bruno  01:44, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of people-related deletions.   —Psychonaut 01:49, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
 * keep all per Seano, Jayrav. There should be detailed discussion about what each one of these should have and whether they would work better as lists or categories but this deletion is not a useful way to discuss that. JoshuaZ 02:42, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep! Wikipedia has been delete happy as of late and I fear that many contributor's hard work will discourage participants and will detract from our ability to catalog human knowledge, the purpose of an encyclopedia. Cheers, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles 03:06, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep All Due to overreaching zeal in nominating too many different articles at once. This is an abuse of the AFD procedure. Edison 03:07, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep AllI sense an abuse of the AfD procesure to push a certain POV.Hkelkar 03:09, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep all. These cannot be appropriately considered all at once here. Sandstein 06:17, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep all for now, because User:Shimeru is being disingenuous by half to select such a wide range of diverse articles (aka "Lists") for deletion. What is possibly wrong with the List of converts to Islam; List of converts to Christianity; List of converts to Judaism; List of converts to Hinduism???? It is a fact that there have been notable conversions to religions by very notable people and vice versa. For example, in the history of Judaism, the case of Sabbatai Zevi the false "Messiah" who left Judaism and became an apostate to Islam shook the Jewish world. Or the case of Paul of Tarsus who left Judaism to become one of Christianity's main architects. The lists are very long. Indeed, the dual notions of Apostasy (abandoning one's faith) and of Religious conversion are central to the world's major religions, which is something that User:Shimeru fails to grasp and through his rash act of nominating so many articles that revolve around such critical and crucual religious ideas smaks of an anti-religious POV in toto. IZAK 07:35, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per Izak and others. Also agree that this is an inappropriate way of AfDeing. --Daniel575 | (talk) 08:24, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per Izak and others.--D-Boy 11:12, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: Do we have to wait a few more days to close this? Can someone please close this right now? The consensus is obviously going to be Keep. --Matt57 13:40, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
 * It could still get "no concensus", but that also keeps it. I think the guy/gal was overly ambitious and killed his/her chances. It's possible if s/he had only nominated the former Muslim list s/he would've done better. (Although still may have lost)--T. Anthony 16:16, 6 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete per nominator. – Kaihsu 15:35, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete all. In my book, any article that starts with "List of..." needs to be comprehensive to be worthwhile, and these can never be. - fchd 19:07, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Then there are some Featured lists you need to put on AfD. These are List of HIV-positive people, List of people with epilepsy, List of notable brain tumor patients, and maybe Cultural depictions of Joan of Arc.--T. Anthony 02:35, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I'd dispute this. List of converts to Christianity includes practically every person on Wikipedia whose biography says that they are a convert to Christianity, and then some. 66.142.52.162 22:11, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Contribs) 19:41, 6 November 2006 (UTC) "
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletions.   -- ~ ONUnicorn (Talk /
 * Strong Keep all - List of converts to Judaism, List of converts to Christianity, List of converts to Islam, and List of converts to Hinduism provide an invaluable research resource, the only one of their kind on the whole internet. Please keep them. 66.142.52.162 22:11, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep Arrow740 00:20, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep per most Keep arguments Mad Jack 01:58, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong delete per above --Nielswik(talk) 15:25, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per Psychonaut. I also disagree that having a category negates the usefulness or keepability of a corresponding list, for (1) sourcing, (2) extra information, and (3) redlink reasons. Carlossuarez46 19:38, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per Psychonaut Shyamsunder 16:09, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment - I'd just like to mention the related article List of Black Jews for people to consider. As you can imagine, it is a frequent target of vandalism, and perhaps a renaming or deletion is in order. --Eliyak T · C 04:51, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Update: I have requested the page be semi-protected at the advice of Matt57. --Eliyak T · C 05:19, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep - a) we have lots of categories and lists on the same topic; if that is your beef, start somewhere else; b) if we are going to have lists and categories of people by their religious affiliation, notable apostates and converts should be last on our list, so to speak. --Leifern 11:20, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep all - List of converts to Judaism, List of converts to Christianity, List of converts to Islam, and List of converts to Hinduism provide an invaluable research resource, the only one of their kind on the whole internet. and there are references provided which ensure that no noe is taking sides. Please keep them.--Lord Anubis 13:58, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Decent research tool and verifiable list.  JASpencer 14:49, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong delete per nom. Also for other people left from any other religions. They are not encyclopaedic materials. Should we also need list people who left some political parties? from a citizenship? I can't believe this article exists here. &mdash; Indon ( reply ) &mdash; 15:14, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Reply - the afd is not only about List of people who left Islam its also about the List of converts to Islam/Hinduism/Judaism/etc.Bakaman Bakatalk 03:46, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, I stated delete all of the nominations. They are unencylopaedic. &mdash; Indon ( reply ) &mdash; 09:11, 10 November 2006 (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.