Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Names of God


 * 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 Snowball keep, but let's be careful about how long the list gets Grutness...wha?  01:29, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Names of God

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)


 * 1) Allah, Yahweh, Brahman, Great Spirit are not the same. By the way, Brahman is not even a being, I only know of Hindus who worship Vishnu, Shiva, and lesser gods like Ganesha and so forth.
 * 2) If the article was describing a particular syncretic movement or organization, then it would be fine. However, as it stands the problem isn't just about a particular viewpoint.  It borders on falsehood as well.--Names of gods (talk) 17:56, 16 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep. The article defines itself clearly: "some names refer almost exclusively to the supreme being of a single religion".  The topic meets the notability criteria. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 18:07, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2008_May_16#Category:Names_of_God for a discussion pertaining to this.--Names of gods (talk) 18:12, 16 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. (possibly rename) This article is about the names used to reference a monotheistic supreme being across cultures. The intro makes that clear. I believe the subject is notable and within wikipedia guidelines. Maybe the article should be renamed to something like Names of monotheistic deities (though it is not the deities, but the religious that are monotheistic), but a slightly confusing title is not reason to delete. Any ideas on changing the title of the article? I think I agree to some extent with the nominator that these deities are not necessarily God, and the implication is that which promotes the POV of pantheism or soft polytheism or something along the lines of "All Gods are one". Maybe Names of God in monotheistic cultures? That's probably too long/complex.-Andrew c [talk] 21:04, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't oppose Names of singular Gods, Names of monotheistic Gods, etc. Of course, several sections like those on Hinduism, Buddhism, etc.  would have to be scrapped.  Additionally,  notice that I proposed Gods in my titles.  I stated that this article equates Yahweh=Allah=Bahai's supreme God=Sikh's Supreme God.  It clearly has a New Age agenda.  User:Names of gods21:44, 16 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I think few people are willing to take a firm stand for or against this article. This article lacks sources from traditional theological books that equate Allah with Yahweh, let alone other Gods of monotheistic religions.  Apparently, a novel dogma is established as incontrovertible fact through repetition. User:Names of gods 22:11, 16 May 2008 (UTC)  =Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.108.31.176 (talk)
 * Comment- The article doesn't seem to realize that Hinduism is polytheist (as different to the monotheistic Abrahamic religions). If kept then renaming to "Names of gods" (note lower case gods) might be in order?--Sting  Buzz Me...   01:01, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Not a bad remedy. Names of principal gods or Names of chief gods would be more in order since the current version of the article doesn't discuss minor gods of polytheistic religions.  Plus, Buddhism and Raelism are nontheistic.--User:Names of gods71.108.31.176 (talk) 01:29, 17 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Saying Hinduism is polytheistic is not really accurate (see Hinduism). Also, your title would change the scope of the article to cover thousands of deities. The focus of this article is monothesism/singular God, not the name of every deity.-Andrew c [talk] 02:15, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Hinduism is polytheistic. I have heard some kooks say Brahma is the equivalent of the Allah and Yahweh for Hinduism.  However, I have asked Hindu Brahmins who told me that the only major gods worship by Hindus are Vishnu and Shiva plus their avatars.  No one worships Brahma.  They recognize Brahma as a god, but don't worship Brahma.--71.108.31.176 (talk) 02:25, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

KEEP this article. You cant find the names compiled like this on any other page here... I need this page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.175.105.145 (talk) 01:37, 17 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. The nominator's reasoning given is based on a fundamental misinterpretation of the article itself. At no point does the article propose that Allah, Brahman, and the others listed here are the same entity; the article is referring to names applied to any singular God by various religions and traditions. At most, rename to names and titles of God to address the claims that some of these names are actually titles or epithets. -Sean Curtin (talk) 02:04, 17 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep— Perhaps cleanup is required here for the sake of clarity and to avoid confusion, but not deletion. Renaming may be called for as well, per Grrmp and Andrew c, but otherwise, just keep as is; I don't see anything wrong with it. -- Mizu onna sango15 / 水 女 珊瑚15  02:19, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep useful, appropriate list. Nomination doesn't cite valid reasons for deletion--they are editing disagreements. JJL (talk) 02:24, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
 * To which of my 2 reasons do you object. Please clarify if you would like to do more than vote.--71.108.31.176 (talk) 02:27, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment both of your points seem to be about factual issues that should be handled by editing. For deletion, what's the reason: Is it not notable? An inappropriate list? JJL (talk) 02:29, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
 * The article name causes confusion of fundamental theological concepts.
 * I am certainly not hell-bent on deletion. I and others suggested several other names particularly with the plural Gods if the content will focus on monotheism or gods if it stay in its current form with some minor edits.
 * The article says. "Conceptions of God can vary widely," which is like saying, "Conceptions of Human can vary widely." It would be accurate to say "Conceptions of the principal Gods of most religions can vary widely," or "Conceptions of divinity can vary widely." User:Name of gods--71.108.31.176 (talk) 02:35, 17 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions.   —Aleta  Sing  03:46, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep, looks like a well-written article, with encyclopedic content. J I P  | Talk 03:53, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I disagree that this article is "well-written" or sacrosanct even if it endeavored to be an article of the Names chief gods of all religions due to its deficiencies. For example, Zeus or Ishtar of Assyrian polytheism aren't included while Jupiter is.--71.108.31.176 (talk) 04:13, 17 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep, a notable topic that contains a large amount of useful and encyclopedic information. If some information in it is wrong, fix it. If some is missing, add it. No particular reason to delete. ~ mazca talk 12:19, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep and close the discussion as the snow keeps rolling


 * 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.