Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Jackson, A Muslim


 * 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. Tone 23:21, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Michael Jackson, A Muslim

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Unreferenced original research. RadioFan (talk) 12:14, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete and merge There does seem to be some notable refs dealing with the question of whether Micheal Jackson was about to convert to Islam - eg LA Times, but if that's considered encyclopedic I think it should go in the main Michael Jackson article -- Boing!   said Zebedee  13:15, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Hey Boing, I think you either mean merge and redirect or delete. See WP:MAD as to why delete and merge is not an acceptable option. - DustFormsWords (talk) 02:08, 17 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete while I applaud the author's excellent motivations for writing this and attempting to debunk a rumor, unfortunately either way it's really just speculation. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  16:52, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete An article that asks and answers, in the negative, whether Michael Jackson was a Muslim. I recognize that this is a new editor and a first time contribution; I can only say that we have an entire library's worth of Michael Jackson articles, some of which discuss his religious beliefs, and any information should be placed there. Mandsford (talk) 16:52, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete just speculation.  JBsupreme  ( talk ) 18:53, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:BEANS. Without the debunking, nobody would have heard of this urban legend. Bearian (talk) 23:50, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Only speculation. --SuperHappyPerson (talk) 05:23, 14 March 2010 (UTC)SuperHappyPerson
 * Delete Of no encyclopedic value. Warrah (talk) 00:10, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - as original research, as an inappropriate content fork of Michael Jackson, and as material that could more appropriately be dealt with on the main article at Michael Jackson. - DustFormsWords (talk)
 * 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.