Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Islam

-- Poetlister 18:05, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Islam
NOTE: The following is the original nomination improperly made at Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Talk:Islam ~ Jeff Q (talk) 02:17, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

This page contains blatant and obvious unbalance towards the subject. Any readers attempting to have them changed have had edits reverted. We have to assume a personal bias by editors reviewing this page, and therefore nominate it for deletion in the interim under the NPOV policy — 62.149.130.131 18:28, 15 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Vote closes: 19:00 22 January 2008
 * Vote extended to 19:00, 24 January 2008 (UTC), because neither original nomination included adding the required vfd-new tag to the article itself. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 18:29, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

NOTE: The following is a parallel nomination made by, also improperly to the main WQ:VFD page, after adding the correct discussion name (which didn't yet exist) to that page. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 02:17, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Completely biased article, contrary to NPOV policy.

NOTE: The following is discussion about the improper nomination on the main WQ:VFD page. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 02:17, 16 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment. This nomination (by ) is not in keeping with our process, outlined at the top of this page. I do not believe we should act on it. --Ubiquity 19:03, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I prefer to reject this request based on two reason. 1) Not following the procedure and 2) NPOV itself is no deletion reason per se. Islam is a notable theme and the requester is strongly recommended to add counterbalancing quotes rather than calling for deletion. --Aphaia 20:07, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I prefer to act on this nomination, and to vote strong keep to establish the precedent. It seems to me to be a reasonable collection of quotes. Most every group of quotes on a subject of controversy (and any religion is bound to be a subject of controversy) will have something objectionable for everyone, so here it is. Cheers! BD2412 T 20:12, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
 * There are two pages for this. The other is [Here], can someone with a tad more experience than I link the two or do whatever magic need be done? -- Greyed 20:13, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

NOTE: The following was a copy-and-paste done by BD2412 at 20:15, 15 January 2008 (UTC), from the original improper nomination, which by now had attracted its own discussion. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 02:17, 16 January 2008 (UTC)


 * No magic, just copying and pasting from the incorrectly named Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Talk:Islam (see that page for edit history):

This page contains blatant and obvious unbalance towards the subject. Any readers attempting to have them changed have had edits reverted. We have to assume a personal bias by editors reviewing this page, and therefore nominate it for deletion in the interim under the NPOV policy — 62.149.130.131 18:28, 15 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Vote closes: 19:00, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep 3 anon IPs post problems with the page in 10 minutes of one another and the third one posts a VFD. The page is fine.  People have been invited to post positive quotations and to date none have appeared.  To me this seems like a typical overreaction of those involved with the subject matter. -- Greyed 18:33, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep : This nomination is either the result of an editor with a very aggressive agenda and little or no interest in the project not being immediately gratified in their desire to radically change the page, or someone who is merely trolling. ~ Kalki 18:45, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. This is certainly a notable topic and I would not like to see the solution for controversial topics or edit wars become the deletion of the page. Note: The VFD tag was placed on the Talk page, rather than the actual project page. ~ UDScott 19:00, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Greyed statement not true.  Suggestions have been made over the past months, only to be reverted.  I would also not want controversial topics or edit wars to become nominations for deletion, but editors on this page have proved impossible.
 * Comment. My statement is true.  Notice that I said invitations to add positive quotations have been extended.  The reversions have been almost exclusively of removal of negative quotations.  Like it or not subjects of this nature are going to contain both positive and negative quotations and both are, to the best of my understanding as conveyed by other editors here on WQ, the pervue of WQ.  You may not agree with the negative quotes.  You may not like them.  That does not mean they are inappropriate and should be removed.  Add all the positive quotes you like, format them well and chances are you would see editors defend those additions just as strictly they  defend positive and negative additions to other pages.  WQ editors, as have been noted on other pages like Talk:Ron Paul, are quite opposed to ideological edits pushing an agenda.  Deleting wide swaths of quotations and replacing them with ill-formated, ideologically opposite quotes smacks of such agenda pushing and are almost universally reverted regardless of the subject matter. -- Greyed 19:53, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

NOTE: The following is the remaining discussion now occurring in the correct location (and credited in this page's edit history). ~ Jeff Q (talk) 02:17, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

So, we can continue the whole discussion organically below. BD2412 T 20:16, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Looks OK to me. As noted above, any page on something controversial will annoy someone but that's no reason to delete.--Poetlister 21:06, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep, but we already have a page on Qur'an, and the Qur'an quotes on the Islam page should be moved there. --Ubiquity 22:10, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep and move Qur'an quotes.--Cato 23:09, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
 * KEEP It is about a belief system some who  do not belive in it MAY say it is contrary to NPOV policy however we should delete thing we do not belive in...NO. What is next Judaism,Buddhism,Theism,Religious freedom, OR Christianity.... That is my opinion   --Lookatthis 23:10, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. As for Qur'an quotes, agreed with Ubiquity. --Aphaia 15:31, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, if there's a quote from the Qur'an that is specifically about Islam, no reason it can't stay, is there? BD2412 T 01:07, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Sure, but since the Qur'an forms the basis of Islam, I don't see how it could refer to it: Islam per se didn't originate until later. On the other hand, in a sense everything in the Qur'an is about Islam, because it's the foundation document. I think we can avoid the question if we try to be consistent with other religions. The pages on Judaism and Hinduism do not have quotations from their holy writings. The page on Christianity does have quotations from the Bible, but I think so many of those are misplaced that it's the exception that proves the rule. --Ubiquity 00:32, 19 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep As with any article where defects are claimed, let's improve it. Nobody would deny that it's a notable subject.--Yehudi 17:05, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep as per Yehudi blessings to you! (unsigned; 122.161.37.88 10:36, 19 January 2008)
 * Keep. Quranic quotes need not stay here; they should be in the Quran article.--Inesculent 13:06, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. Above before the page merger I pointed out that the edits were based on fighting "agenda pushers" regardless of which agenda they are pushing.  I just wanted to point out an example of this so future editors who read the archives will understand that really is the case.  On Talk:Allah there's a discussion going about keeping negative comments out of the page because they seem to be more about agenda pushing than about the subject matter.  If there were, as the nominator stated, "personal bias by editors reviewing this page" one would expect the negative quotes to be defended, not refuted. -- Greyed 18:40, 23 January 2008 (UTC)