Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Islam and the Jews: The Unfinished Battle

Who would defend articles on these books if they are added to Wikipedia? --JuanMuslim 20:17, September 9, 2005 (UTC)

"The Holy Reich : Nazi Conceptions of Christianity, 1919-1945" by Richard Steigmann-Gall

"Unholy Alliance: A History of the Nazi Involvement With the Occult" by Norman Mailer

"A Moral Reckoning: The Role of the Catholic Church in the Holocaust and Its Unfulfilled Duty of Repair" by Daniel Jonah Goldhagen

"Twisted Cross: The German Christian Movement in the Third Reich" by Doris L. Bergen


 * I don't know people yet here who are considiring to dedicate their time to create Category:Books critical of whatever I don't like. Cheers -- Svest 20:54, September 9, 2005 (UTC) Wiki me up&#153;


 * Sure, I would defend articles on those books. Why, you wouldn't? Babajobu 21:37, 9 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Babajobu, the question is not to defend them or not. What is important is to defend something which merits. Can you tell me which of the books above are notable? Honestly, I can't. Why? Simply because I haven't read them all to judge. To give you an example of mine, I haven't watched Titanic (1997 movie) and I had decided to never watch it because I thought that it didn't cover the fact that unwealthy travellers didn't have the same fate of the wealthy one. I always was against the movie w/o watching it. It turned out to be wrong. Yes, I was wrong defending my decision according to my false judgments! So I'd never defend anything untill I am sure and I'd not defend it just because I think so.
 * I am not sure of neither the notability nor the facts stated on the books above. The Category: Books critical of Islam exists but only 4 out of a dozen are presented to Afd. Why? because they are questionable and not because people are against that category. Cheers Svest 21:58, September 9, 2005 (UTC) Wiki me up&#153;
 * That's lovely, Fayssal, but books by Norman Mailer or Daniel Goldhagen are notable simply because of who the authors are. So I'd be quite confident defending articles on those books, whether I like them or not. Babajobu 14:26, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
 * If you believe so than great and of course your judgement would be based on something objective and not as some wikipedians who just defend something based on what they like or don't like. Cheers -- Svest 16:28, September 10, 2005 (UTC) Wiki me up&#153;