Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Christian Nobel laureates

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. We have a majority for keeping, but not quite consensus, considering the "merge" opinions. Perhaps there should be an RFC about this type of list in general Sandstein 18:26, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

List of Christian Nobel laureates[edit]

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

There ahve been three separate deletion debates for articles on "list of [religion] Nobel laureates", Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of atheist Nobel laureates, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of atheist Nobel laureates (2nd nomination), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of atheist Nobel laureates (3rd nomination). All have closed as delete, all have been followed not long after by someone re-creating the list. The problem is the same every time: a trivial intersection of arbitrary categories with irresolvable problems of WP:SYN and WP:NPOV. Guy (Help!) 13:50, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: There also list's about List of Jewish Nobel laureates and List of Muslim Nobel laureates and List of Hindu Nobel laureates. the list is well sourced and neutral.

And this list is not an original research since been several studies or infortmation about the religions of Nobel prize laureates as the book 100 Years of Nobel Prizes by Baruch A. Shalev, and cientific Elite: Nobel Laureates in the United States by Harriet Zuckerman, and Nobel prize winners in physics from 1901 to 1990 that done by the University of Nebraska–Lincoln in 1998, and Comparative Religion For Dummie by William P. Lazarus and Mark Sullivan, and The Nobel Prize: A History of Genius, Controversy, and Prestige by Burton Feldman and others.--Jobas (talk) 13:56, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thoise were also deleted and then re-created, and the WP:SYN means it's not "well-sourced and neutral". Guy (Help!) 14:17, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes but not single word about these list. the list moslty sourced by the Nobel Foundation. which is a reliable source, alot of WP:IDONTLIKEIT is going latley.--

Strong delete: I do not see any relation between the religious beliefs of one individual and his career or the fact he has won a Nobel prize. I fully agree with the arguments of the proponent and I have furthermore the feeling that this kind of list falls within the scope of WP:OR. Beside all articles based on the pattern "list of [religion] Nobel laureates should be deleted as well. --Lebob (talk) 14:21, 24 September 2015 (UTC)--Lebob (talk) 14:21, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Both list List of Jewish Nobel laureates and List of Muslim Nobel laureates is still and no one ask for delet it. wonder why.Jobas (talk) 14:24, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, both of those articles have been deleted before. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of atheist Nobel laureates (2nd nomination), in which the lists of atheist, Christian, Hindu, Humanist, Jewish, and Muslim Nobel laureates were all deleted. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:49, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

And they have appeared again. Methinks there is no consensus, except temporary ones. But this is not a case of fringe theory or POV pushing. I see no need to delete what some people find useful, even if others think it's a waste of time. There are plenty of articles I would have no interest in whatever, but why should that prevent or overturn their existence? Breadth is one of the benefits WP can offer. Let's use that. Evensteven (talk) 04:21, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not only that some people interested about these kind of list. It's also been several studies or infortmation about the religions of Nobel prize laureates as the book 100 Years of Nobel Prizes by Baruch A. Shalev, and cientific Elite: Nobel Laureates in the United States by Harriet Zuckerman, and Nobel prize winners in physics from 1901 to 1990 that done by the University of Nebraska–Lincoln in 1998, and Comparative Religion For Dummie by William P. Lazarus and Mark Sullivan, and The Nobel Prize: A History of Genius, Controversy, and Prestige by Burton Feldman and others.--Jobas (talk) 11:09, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep What would be POV is deleting this and keeping the others. People are interested in such lists, as their history shows. Other people really don't like them. I don't actually see an inherent WP:SYN issue. Johnbod (talk) 14:47, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep There is plenty of interest in lists of this type. It would be POV to remove this one only (as bias against its specific topic), and POV to remove them all (as bias against such lists in general). Yet no list promotes a POV itself, nor do the lists jointly. That there is a continual campaign for/against such lists is merely a reflection of differences among editors. But it does no harm to WP to have the lists present, and does not violate WP:NPOV. Let them all remain and be useful to those who wish to use them. WP:SYN is being used as an excuse to get rid of them, but lists are by their nature highly resistant to synthesis, since they list things only, and don't seek to analyze or draw conclusions from the raw data they present. And now we get cries of WP:OR too, just because the list has documented sources. That is not what WP:OR means. Evensteven (talk) 15:45, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The lists for other religions and for atheists should also be restored. This is not a trivial intersection. As an analogy, consider lists of Nobel laureates by country. Nationality is arguably less important than religion, but, for example, the number of German Nobel laureates dropped abruptly after 1914, a fact that has significance in the history of science. The religious beliefs of scientists and the way these change over time are also significant.

Articles are supposed to be deleted as a last resort when they cannot be improved. If some of the laureates do not have a source that establish their religion then they should not be included on any list, but the sourced entries should be kept. I don't see a POV issue because the list merely states beliefs. It doesn't argue that Christians are better at science or worse, and doesn't even compare laureates with the global population of the time. It might be a solution to merge to List of Nobel laureates by religion, and this would facilitate discussing those that do not have a clear source. Roches (talk) 16:28, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Merge. I can't see any justification for having List of Jewish Nobel laureates and List of Muslim Nobel laureates without having List of Christian Nobel laureates. But I don't see any reason for separate lists and Roches' suggestion above to merge into List of Nobel laureates by religion is entirely reasonable. Gnome de plume (talk) 16:49, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Merge or Keep. There is significant debate over whether religious belief is compatible with scientific work, therefore lists like this are useful. Compiling a list such as this, List of Jewish Nobel laureates, List of Muslim Nobel laureates and List of atheist Nobel laureates is not original research; it's compiling existing research. I think Gnome de plume is right that it would be best to have one list for all religions, and some of the text in the article needs to be fixed. But deleting the article isn't necessary. Argyriou (talk) 18:54, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: since there are List of Jewish Nobel laureates and List of Muslim Nobel laureates and List of Hindu Nobel laureates I see no objection to keep. This is an FYI page on wikipedia and people who study the intersection of science and religion may be interested in such info especially considering that some popular works seem to use Nobel demographics to comment on religion and science for good or bad.Mayan1990 (talk) 19:32, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Mayan1990 Not only that some people becouse intersection of science and religion. It's also been several studies or infortmations about the religions of Nobel prize laureates as the book 100 Years of Nobel Prizes by Baruch A. Shalev, and cientific Elite: Nobel Laureates in the United States by Harriet Zuckerman, and Nobel prize winners in physics from 1901 to 1990 that done by the University of Nebraska–Lincoln in 1998, and Comparative Religion For Dummie by William P. Lazarus and Mark Sullivan, and The Nobel Prize: A History of Genius, Controversy, and Prestige by Burton Feldman and others.--Jobas (talk) 11:09, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: No objections in principle to merging, but I would question the practicality. The size of this particular list is quite long already, and has 480 references. I can't say it makes sense to make a Winnebago list (throw in everything including the kitchen sink), just in order to keep the number of lists down. Evensteven (talk) 21:09, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with user Evensteven, the List of Christian Nobel laureates is already long beside the List of Jewish Nobel laureates is long too with 263 references.--Jobas (talk) 21:14, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per sound arguments of Mayan1990. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:24, 24 September 2015 (UTC).[reply]
Keep Seems to pass WP:LISTN. Andrew D. (talk) 23:28, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. samtar ^(msg) 08:05, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as an unrelated intersection of facts, specifically the sort of thing discouraged by list guidelines. Besides, this is NOT the best way to handle this information. If we want to include information about the religion of Nobel laureates, why not simply add a field to the main lists themselves. Simple elegant solution, and having only one article to find ask relevant information is better than having several. --Jayron 32 12:41, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Not only because it is hard to argue to delete this one when we have lists for Muslim, Jewish and Hindu laureates (I'm pretty sure there have been Japanese - presumably Buddhist laureats as well) but faith-by-birth or culture may not be as unrelated as Jayron32 and others assert, at least, not if we consider Hindu, Muslim, Christian and Jewish as cultures or civilizations. Serious scholars do argue that civilizational values correlate with or produce differential types of achievement. So I can see a potential use for this kind of list - Aside from the simple Lutheran pride type thing.E.M.Gregory (talk) 14:36, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. E.M.Gregory (talk) 14:39, 27 September 2015 (UTC) 05:00, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and reinstate the atheists and other religions. Nobel Prizes are so significant that a number of rules that apply elsewhere do not apply to them. Religion may well be irrelevant in the case of the scientific Nobel prizes, but quite significant in the motivation of the winner for the literature and peace prizes, possibly even economics. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:05, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:30, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:30, 2 October 2015 (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.