Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Muslim writers and poets

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 No consensus (procedural close). There are a considerable number of editors opining that a single outcome for all of these lists is impossible, and even among those that do not, this discussion has become too fragmented. There are also concerns that the creators have not been notified, although I have not investigated each of those. So I'm closing this as no consensus, with the expectation that the lists will be nominated at AfD individually. Feel free to link from one discussion to another, so that participants who have done due diligence may express useful opinions at each of the discussions. Vanamonde (Talk) 21:59, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

List of Muslim writers and poets

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No sourcing to show that they are practicing 'Muslims' or believers. See the previous AfD on a similar list, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Muslim doctors. Störm (talk) 20:30, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following related pages because religion has no place in someones profession:

Pinging previous participants, maybe they want to comment. @Ajf773:, @Johnpacklambert:, @Ajf773:, @Dodger67:, @Ozzie10aaaa:, @Hispring:, @Squeeps10:. Störm (talk) 20:46, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:44, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:44, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration. Andrew D. (talk) 23:07, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Such a list could exist but must then be limited to authors who specifically write about Islam. Which of course does not mean they have to be Muslim. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 20:59, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all except for List of Muslim writers and poets, List of Muslims in entertainment and the media, and List of Muslim leaders and politicians as failing WP:EGRS. The rest should have entries attributed to reliable sources, like the articles themselves. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 22:09, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WP:EGRS is about categories not lists. It seems to be all over the place in its guidance and says that outcomes vary wildly. There are in fact numerous categories of this kind – see Category:Muslims by occupation, which has many sub-categories. Andrew D. (talk) 23:30, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep all This is a trainwreck already because of the canvassing of editors who all !voted delete before while failing to notify the creators of these various pages. There are numerous books which cover Muslim contributions to arts and sciences of various sorts and so WP:LISTN is passed and the nomination quite fails to address this. Some examples follow. Andrew D. (talk) 23:07, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Pen and the Faith: Eight Modern Muslim Writers and the Qur'an
Boundaries and Frontiers in Medieval Muslim Geography
1001 Inventions: The Enduring Legacy of Muslim Civilization
A History of Muslim Historiography
Lost History: The Enduring Legacy of Muslim Scientists, Thinkers, and Artists
Science & Islam: A History
Islam and Science, Medicine, and Technology

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:36, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:36, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:36, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:36, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:36, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:36, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:36, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:36, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, apologies for the need to add this afd to such a ridiculous number of afd lists but this is what happens when such a ridiculous number of articles are nominated under the one afd. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:38, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - doesn't the existence of Category:Lists of people by belief suggest that we do, in fact, have lists like these? There are a lot more articles that fit this form (even just within the "Lists of Muslims") and I think we need a broader discussion about this. Guettarda (talk) 01:44, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep all as useful lists populated by actual wp articles. Trout to the nominator for blatant canvassing. Really these many AfDs should be closed based on that bad faith canvassing. Lightburst (talk) 03:09, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete A fourth of the world's population is Muslim, making these massively overbroad cross-categorizations. Of course science in the Muslim world is a historical topic, but I laugh at the idea that the existence of a book called "Islam and Science, Medicine, and Technology" means that a list of Muslim doctors and a list of Muslim scientists are themselves notable; rather, all of Andrew D's books provide content for articles like Islamic attitudes towards science, Science in the medieval Islamic world, Islamic literature, and Islamic art, not context-free lists of names without narrow inclusion criteria. You can put more biographical details of significant individuals in those pages, but without major restructuring none of these nominated work as stand-alone lists. I find it interesting that about everyone at List_of_Muslims_in_entertainment_and_the_media#Journalism_and_media works in English-speaking news media. The thousands in Category:Pakistani politicians, Category:Indonesian politicians, etc. could be imported in mass to List of Muslim leaders and politicians. List of Moroccan writers is somehow longer than List of Muslim writers and poets! List of Iranian painters is longer than List of Muslim painters! Also disappointed by the lack of sources and that I just had to remove someone from the business list. I fear that the bulk nomination would derail this, but this calls for TNT. Reywas92^Talk 05:22, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep all pending thorough discussion about each one individually. We can’t just junk a mass of articles in this arbitrary fashion. There are valid lists for an encyclopaedia for topics like geography and science, because classical Islamic scholarship began at a defined date and ended at dates which are also generally agreed, making them definable and notable topics (though the names of some of the lists might need to change). Other lists which are more or less ‘people on tv with name that sound Muslim to me’ should be deleted, but they can’t been done as a job lot. Mccapra (talk) 08:12, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Struck geographers list based on your reservation. Störm (talk) 08:42, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all per WP:SALAT as too broad. Also, religion is generally irrelevant with respect to these fields, on a par with (or even slightly below) List of left-handed painters or List of blond poets. Clarityfiend (talk) 08:56, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The vague wave to WP:SALAT is misleading because that guideline does not recommend deleting broad classifications. Instead, it suggests adding more structure such as sections, to subdivide the entries and so assist the reader. The claim that religion is irrelevant to these fields is also false. For example, leaders and politicians in the Muslim world are commonly expected to follow the religion or even be descended from the Prophet – see Political aspects of Islam. Andrew D. (talk) 19:41, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - based on the above comments, I've withdrawn few nominations, they are: List of Muslim geographers, List of Muslim scientists, and List of Muslim astronomers. I think they were useful if we limit them to the medieval Islamic world, so I went ahead and removed recent biographies from them. Other lists are clearly WP:LISTCRUFT and are obvious deletes. Störm (talk) 09:07, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment thanks to he nominator for reducing the scope of this to something more manageable. On the main article nominated, List of Muslim writers and poets, it looks to me like a catch-all and I think we’d need some supporting evidence in each case that the person listed was actually a Muslim and did not just have Muslim heritage, so that it has the same rigour as List of Catholic authors. We have a List of Catholic artists but that is based on their creation of Catholic religious art, not their actual or supposed beliefs. For this reason I can’t see any basis for retaining List of Muslim painters. Each item in the List of Muslims in entertainment and the media does seem to be individually sourced so it may be reliable, and it is the kind of thing I can imagine people looking to Wikipedia to provide, so that one looks like it should be kept. List of Muslim leaders and politicians looks completely scattergun and useless. There may be some value in having a much smaller list of Muslim politicians in countries with a non-Muslim majority population. Likewise a list of Muslim businessmen in countries without a Muslim majority might have some value (questionable) but List of Muslims in business is a mix of every businessman in Saudi Arabia....and some other people. Happy to delete that one. Mccapra (talk) 09:34, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: This is a mess. After the obvious canvassing of delete voters, the nominator has now altered the nomination. This nomination should be withdrawn WP:SKCRIT. A new AfD should be opened so that we can start fresh without these serious violations of process. Lightburst (talk) 13:38, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Make productive comments as they would be more helpful. Störm (talk) 22:33, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Related Discussion - I consider it appropriate to link to an ANI discussion that has been launched about the propriety of this AfD Nosebagbear (talk) 22:54, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep. There are plenty of atheist related articles such as List of atheists in music even though atheism isn't particularly associated with music. On the other hand, Islam is extremely influential in Islamic cultures and it would make sense that it would affect the literature/poems in those cultures. In addition, Wikipedia's growth of religion, desecularization, postsecularism and Demographics of atheism all seem to indicate that atheists/secularists will decrease in cultural influence in the future while Muslims, Christians and other growing religions will increase in cultural influence and significance. Maybe it is a reflection of Wikipedia's editor base that an undue amount of "list of atheist..." articles exist. I suspect with the atheist population shrinking in its percentage of the world population and its expected shrinkage in Western nations by the latter part of the 21st century, Wikipedia's list of atheist related articles will be pruned.Knox490 (talk) 02:00, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. per Lightburst. Islam gives a viewpoint to the poem or politician or business.Saff V. (talk) 09:41, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all too large, indiscriminate, and inviting of original research re the religion of living people. —David Eppstein (talk) 16:31, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all There are potentially valid reasons to keep each article, but some of the reasons may or may not apply to each list. I think the lists could be much better defined, such as List of Muslims politicians in Luxembourg, or List of Muslim academics in Monaco, but those discussions should be held in the talk pages - not as part of a mass deletion effort. --Enos733 (talk) 17:14, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but rename List of Muslim painters. There is a description at the start of that article a link to Islamic art. So rename it list of painters of Islamic art. Lists of Muslim scientists and scholars just lists three other lists articles, so if that's all it is going to be no point to it. List of Muslim scientists already redirects to List of scientists in medieval Islamic world. List of Muslim leaders and politicians, are they notable and get coverage for that aspect of them? Are there list of other religions or ethnic groups for politicians, entertainers, or businesses? Dream Focus 23:40, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dream Focus Good proposal. But you know Islam doesn't allow imagery, statues so no chance of artists in Islam. The artists who are on the list never made Islamic art. Störm (talk) 13:55, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Um, what? XOR'easter (talk) 00:09, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep all All of these lists are useful to the purpose of this encyclopedia, and the people who use it. They contain/point-to notable information. And yes, Islamic Art certainly does exist, for example a great collection is at the Metropolitan Museum of Art. With all due respect to the good-faith intentions of the nominator, this AfD should be withdrawn. Netherzone (talk) 13:44, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Not all of these lists are useful and some cross categories are not even relevant (eg. List of Muslim doctors). However, I suggest these lists are nominated individually.--DreamLinker (talk) 20:29, 4 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all - useful lists for the purpose of Wikipedia which contain or lead to articles with notable information. Bookscale (talk) 10:05, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all, relist individually with individual rationales, if appropriate (but renaming these lists and narrowing their focus probably makes more sense than deletion). This AFD is too much of a mess to every reach a useful conclusion, and has been changed after people expressed their opinions. Guettarda (talk) 12:19, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all for the moment. I think it was a mistake to bundle all these together and we need a sensible discussion about each one. As they stand I’d vote ‘keep’ for some and ‘delete’ for others. Mccapra (talk) 03:22, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Wikipedia:Stand-alone lists says, "Special care must be taken when adding living persons to lists based on religion" - WP:CAT/R says, "Categories regarding religious beliefs or lack of such beliefs of a living person should not be used unless the subject has publicly self-identified with the belief in question (see WP:BLPCAT), either through direct speech or through actions like serving in an official clerical position for the religion. For a dead person, there must be a verified consensus of reliable published sources that the description is appropriate." These principles apply equally to lists - Epinoia (talk) 04:38, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - @Epinoia: yes and for some elements of some of these lists those sources exist. Some of the lists need sourcing and editing down. Some of the lists are probably not worth retaining even if we can source the fact that individuals on them are/were Muslims. But we can't just chuck the lot out, and we can't expect editors to run around trying to source a huge number of lists at the same time. Let's take them all one by one and we can have a sensible discussion about each. If this discussion was unbundled I would vote delete on the List of Muslim writers and poets itself because even for those names where we could source their belief (not difficult in many cases) it would still be too much of a catch-all and not a useful list in itself. But a discussion among editors might suggest some useful repurposing of the material. For historical and non-contentious individuals we might agree that a list by country, continent or historic period would be useful even if the current list isn't. It's just shoddy and slapdash to chuck all this in a skip. Mccapra (talk) 12:00, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

not that theres anything wrong with chucking things into skips, says coola, who has retrieved a number of "treasures" from skips over the years:)) Coolabahapple (talk) 12:39, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Lists of Muslim scientists and scholars per nom. If we stop assuming that every Arab and Iranian is a Muslim, then the page ceases to have a purpose (since it would only contain List of Muslim scientists). Delete List_of_Muslim_painters as unuseful; its just an unreferenced list of names. If someone wants to categorize painters that way, just start Category:Muslim_painters. The others are likely to become so large that they're no longer useful some day. But they look fine for now, and "Looks fine. Maybe useful" are basically the criteria in WP:SALAT. Ajpolino (talk) 18:57, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[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.