- 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. Veinor (talk to me) 17:12, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Enemy of Islam (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
This is a procedural nomination of a contested proposed deletion. The proposer, User:Sa.vakilian, stated that the article is Neologism and POV forking without any relevant and reliable source as I described in the talk page. Spacepotato 23:02, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- comment Despite being a neologism, this is a different sort of neologism, more like a newspeak, from the Iran government, which dictated many policies directly and indirectly. George Leung 02:03, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
keep.Seems to be supported by sources.Sorry, after looking at the sources, I am not quite sure. May be redirect as Alex Bakharev suggested. Biophys 03:21, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]- Delete Because of POV forking, Neologism and unreliability this article is against Wikipedia:Notability. --Sa.vakilian(t-c) 04:56, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Clearly notable by numerous sources in article.--Sefringle 05:09, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment My dear friend, please pay attention to those sources. I checked them one by one:
- They're irrelevant sources[1][[2] [3][4][[5] or political slogans[6][7]. You don't mean we should make new entries for all of the slogans of the media. User:Patchouli made too many of these kinds of articles([8] and [9]) and finally was banned because of violations of wikipedia policies.--Sa.vakilian(t-c) 05:32, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- They are about as notable as the sources that were used to "prove" notability for Gary Miller (Abdul-Ahad Omar). This topic is at least as notable as that article, which was "proven" notable through a previous Afd discussion. Not to mention it is recognized by the daily times of Pakistan [10], Japan Today [11], and BBC News [12]--Sefringle 02:54, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- CommentThe sources are notable but the texts are irrelevant. I narrate some of what you've recognized as good sources for this article.:
- Lead of Daily time's article:Iran’s schools are nurturing a siege mentality in children with textbooks showing preparations for war and depicting Israel and the West as the enemy, an Israeli think tank said on Tuesday.
- Title of Japan today's article:Sudan, Iran vow to defeat "enemies of Islam"(The text isn't available)
- Relevant part of BBC's article: Arab countries are trying to forget the existence of a cancerous tumour in the heart of the World of Islam and are closing their eyes to this real enemy of Muslims... The Islamic Republic of Iran and any other country that enjoys sovereignty should do their best to launch an Islamic anti-Zionist movement against Israel.
- I can gather numerous of such sources which hasn't used Enemy of Islam as an expression or technical word.--Sa.vakilian(t-c) 02:52, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually the entire Pakistan link is relevant. The BBC link is partially relevant. And here is another source to prove its notability (fron the Islamic Republic of Iran broadcasting website): [13]--Sefringle 10:41, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- CommentThe sources are notable but the texts are irrelevant. I narrate some of what you've recognized as good sources for this article.:
- They are about as notable as the sources that were used to "prove" notability for Gary Miller (Abdul-Ahad Omar). This topic is at least as notable as that article, which was "proven" notable through a previous Afd discussion. Not to mention it is recognized by the daily times of Pakistan [10], Japan Today [11], and BBC News [12]--Sefringle 02:54, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect to Jihad merging the slavagable content. No need for a POV fork Alex Bakharev 06:34, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Neologism, unreliable refs--Gerash77 09:07, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Stubby article about self-explanatory phrase. This is just an all-purpose term of abuse used by the Iranian government for people it doesn't like. Had it been a specific category in law it might be worth a page here, but that doesn't seem to be the case. --Folantin 09:24, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - this term is potentially so broad as to be virtually meaningless for encyclopedic purposes. As Folantin points out, perhaps if the Iranian Government starts locking people up for the crime of being Enemies of Islam, then maybe an article about the legal use, but at the moment there is no such use. Moreschi Request a recording? 09:34, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - Not a 'special' term deserving of its own article. Someone can be an enemy of America, enemy of Christianity, enemy of whatever... enemy of Islam is just a basic term for an enemy of Islam. It appears to be a Patchouli relic anyway, so its bias and very existence is not surprising. The Behnam 15:22, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - While I am more of a mergist, thinking that stuff can always be salvaged from junk, there is simply too much POV nonsense to go through to get to it. I think the subject matter is worthy of discussion, but this should be considered a failed attempt at an overview of the topic. Arcayne 23:32, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - I really can't see that there's much to salvage from this mess. -- Chairman S. Talk Contribs 00:59, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - The precedent this would set is stupid. Enemy of x. The title is going to be a POV fork no matter what. This is almost as ridiculous of the Allegations of x format. --Ķĩřβȳ♥♥♥ŤįɱéØ 19:12, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, per The Benham. ITAQALLAH 20:27, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per Sefringle. The many notable and useful sources used in the article makes it obvious that the articles subject is important enough to have an article about. -- Karl Meier 21:11, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - Pov fork and neologism.--Aldux 17:45, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - per all the reasons given above.Bless sins 21:40, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - a obvious POV fork. --- SAndTLets Talk 23:14, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge any salvageable content to jihad and delete the rest. Not notable enough a phrase to warrant its own article; issues of education and textbooks are more properly dealt with elsewhere (or should be). Avi 05:42, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep It is noteworthy & used in too many places as a propaganda tool. For example, Pervez Musharraf is dubbed enemy of Islam by Islamists.[14]--Todya1545 21:47, 25 March 2007 (UTC) — Todya1545 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
- comment This looks like a Sock puppets which has made to vote here.Special:Contributions/Todya1545--Sa.vakilian(t-c) 03:54, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - Not notable term to the subject of an article in an encyclopedia. What about enemy of the west? [15] Wikipidian 22:34, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep This label has been used to convict many people during the Iranian Revolution. I fail to see how it is a neologism. Although it was created by Patchouli it is not very biased. Much of the biased and POV material has been removed. Since it does not contain POV material, it is not a POV fork. Agha Nader 01:45, 26 March 2007 (UTC)Agha Nader[reply]
- 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.