Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Non-denominational Muslim

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 keep. Thanks to the improvements made by several editors (non-admin closure) -- Sam Sailor ^Talk! 06:45, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Non-denominational Muslim[edit]

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

There appears to be only one source(kinda dubious in nature) which actually uses the term "non denominational". No other source uses this term. Furthermore there appears to be a large amount of OR in the article (almost 85-90%) and removing the OR will leave this article almost blanked. In the present state the article should be deleted asap. FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 03:06, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

First Partial merge of sourced information into more appropriate articles and then delete per WP:OR. - HyperGaruda (talk) 04:50, 19 October 2015 (UTC) Weak keep/move: after that source barrage by Kleinebeesjes, I'm hesitating a bit about deleting it. However, "Just a Muslim" does not sound very encyclopedic (more like a song title), so I hope there is an attested synonym that is more fit for Wiki. - HyperGaruda (talk) 09:29, 19 October 2015 (UTC) Keep: editors have done a bang-up job finding sources (special thanks to Kleinebeesjes) to replace the initial original research -although some is still left, but at least that OR is not too important. - HyperGaruda (talk) 06:19, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. Human3015^TALK 05:22, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and move to Just a Muslim. The phrase "just a Muslim" gets the most search returns on google books. While "just Muslim" also gets search returns although fewer in number. Kleinebeesjes (talk) 07:48, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Any comment on the 90% of the page which is pure OR?FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 08:31, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say there's less than 20% OR, although that 20% includes some of the more important bits like definition. - HyperGaruda (talk) 09:29, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If in any case this article is going to stay then "Just a Muslim" is very non-encyclopedic name, instead current name is better. There are many Muslims who considers themselves as just a Muslim and not shia, sunni, ahmadiya or else. But we need more sources regarding this. This is very interesting topic as far as sectarian violence within Muslims is concerned. --Human3015^TALK 10:12, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

* DELETE asap. The main Muslim page should contain the Pew Data and the non-sectarian definitions/concepts of the term "Muslim" anyway. Which means there is no need for this page. And once it is deleted, the project of improving the Muslim page can begin. cӨde1+6^LogicBomb! 15:07, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Such promises usually never get fulfilled. You first add things related to "non-denominational muslims" in main Muslim page then we can think about deleting this page. What if your edits will get reverted once you add such things in main muslim page after deleting this page? It will be better to add this article in main Islam template. As per Quranic concept of "Muslim" there is no denomination for Muslims. Quran does not prescribes any denomination for any Muslim so rather I will say this can be the most important topic of Islam. --Human3015^TALK 15:51, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fairly confident that we can find reliable scholarly sources to expand/improve the Muslim and Islam pages, to emphasize the non-sectarian definitions of these terms, so I'm not too worried. It would actually be problematic to try and add stuff there while this page exists (because of the overlap.) This is why I think we should delete this page first. cӨde1+6^LogicBomb! 16:37, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, I guess: User HyperGaruda is right, the article's sources have now been improved considerably by Kleinebeesjes, so I guess we're stuck with this article. I'll eventually add to it and improve it as well I guess (although I still think improving the main Muslim article with all this information would've been much better.) cӨde1+6^LogicBomb! 14:10, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep certainly well referenced enough to establish notability. Possible OR issues should be discussed at some other venue as a matter of article improvement, not as deletion here. Finnusertop (talk | guestbook | contribs) 02:35, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per discussion on Talk:Non-denominational Muslim#Questioning Nondenominational. Septate (talk) 04:59, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: As per my previous comments. "Non-denominational muslim" is core philosophy of Islam. Also article is improved very much now and looks in good shape. Sources has been added by another user. --Human3015^TALK 03:45, 21 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.