Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Muslim destruction of Christian history

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. A clear consensus for deletion has been established herein. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 20:39, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Muslim destruction of Christian history

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

Clear violation of WP:SYNTH, as no sources in the article discuss the matter underneath the topic umbrella created in this article. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 05:25, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Don't Delete There is a long and extremely well-documented history of Muslims destroying holy Christian sites throughout the Middle East, including from National Geographic. There is no reason that a Wikipedia article should not reflect this. Wikiwillkane (talk) 05:38, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Then I guess you'll Delete/Nuke Japanese war crimes and Christian terrorism. Wikiwillkane (talk) 06:24, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The topic may be notable, through I don't see any sources. But this is a de-facto list of "Muslim crimes against Christians", a xenophobic NPOV beating stick based on few newspaper articles. What's next, List of crimes committed by immigrants? Mexicans? Americans? Jews? Wikipedia is no place for lists of hates. Nuke it. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:55, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The topic is notable. But, this is clearly a POV. If you look back through history, pretty much every religion destroyed another religion's stuff at least once. The title seems to be POV as well. I agree with User:Piotrus. Nuke it and change the title, then make a better, more neutral article. NOTE: User:Wikiwillkane has been punished before for making articles and making POV edits related to the Arab-Israeli Conflict.ThePlatypusofDoom (Talk) 11:41, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete While the underlying topic is notable (specifically the history of conflict between Christianity and Islam), the important bits are already neutrally discussed at Christianity and Islam. Given the title and the content, there is no way this article can be made NPOV Intelligentsium 13:45, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
~~Don't Delete~~ The article's intent is to document relatively recent examples of the destruction of Christian edifices. It would appear to be unique in that regard and worthwhile. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:31EB:A760:E5FE:B3EB:760F:1A15 (talk) 14:31, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Vote is invalid as is the first edit of the user, possible sockpuppetry/SPA. ThePlatypusofDoom (Talk) 18:43, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- There is already an article List_of_heritage_sites_damaged_during_the_Syrian_Civil_War and Destruction of cultural heritage by ISIL which cover this topic without making reference to Islam. The title of this article suggests that Muslims in general have a tendency to destroy Christian history (as if the opposite has never happened...) Intelligentsium 15:20, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Administrator note - I've struck this IP's !vote, as ducks are fairly easy to spot. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 22:09, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
~~Don't Delete~~ If the ultimate goal of Wikipedia is to meld every article and subject into one long single Wikipedia article with many sub-headings, then please, delete this article. That seems to be the gist of the arguments for deletion. Can we not write about an ongoing milestone in civilization such as a concerted effort by many Muslims to wipe away Christianity and its history? The example given that sites were destroyed in the Syrian civil war is a non sequitur. Moreover, Wikipedia's view of non-biased seems to be hijacking moral equivalency. If a concerted and ongoing action by Muslims is highlighted through thousands of documents, why must we now highlight in the same Wikipedia article, all concerted efforts perpetrated against Muslims? Lastly, my "Warning (not "punishment") was related to the 500/30, not to POV edits. At least let's be factual. Wikiwillkane (talk) 18:04, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment First, you have already voted. Second, Muslims are not trying to "Wipe away Christianity". You are confusing Islam with ISIL. Also, as Intelligentsium said, Christianity totally hasn't done that..... totally... . Also, even if we accept your arguments, this is still biased, and does not follow WP:NPOV. This is biased, plain and simple. Even if we kept it, we would change the title, TNT the article, and you would have no part in editing it due to bias. It's clear that you are a Christian, as you described these sites as "holy". As an atheist, I have no bias on the subject. Notifying an Admin, as this could use attention. ThePlatypusofDoom (Talk) 18:41, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  - ThePlatypusofDoom accused me of voting twice. He/she is wrong and has vandalized both MY edit and another user's. All I did was add a "Don't Delete" to his/her section and a bullet. Most importantly, ThePlatypusofDoom clearly states that one can only be unbiased if they are an atheist. I stated holy sites (meaning, holy to them). I am not a Christian, but thank you for clarifying how biased you are. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiwillkane (talk • contribs) 21:41, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    - I was the one who "vandalized" your response to strike the second vote. You clearly voted twice. All edits are recorded in the Page history, but even barring that there is already a vote with your name attached to it at the top of the page. Your religion is irrelevant; the article title and content are the questions at hand, and both of them suggest that the facts that the perpetrators of the destruction are Muslims and the artefacts destroyed are Christian are somehow relevant, where in reality this is simply an extremist group disowned by all mainstream Muslim figures destroying artefacts and sites which are culturally significant to many groups. Intelligentsium 22:45, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I removed POV material from the article. Go to article history to see the POV version. ThePlatypusofDoom (Talk) 20:00, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. As written this is clear bias, Examples: "also states that “there were no Christian schools in the country" which while presumably true, is irrelevant to the topic of the article; "the church was built in dedication to the one and a half MILLION Armenians who.." (not the full capitals for MILLIONS); "the destruction of the tomb of the prophet Jonah" (Jonah , for one thing, was not a Christian prophet but a Jewish prophet who prophecies were later used by the Christians) sourced articled discussing the destruction of Muslim sites as well as Christian and Jewish. The bias seems so great that any possible article would need to start over.here probably are publications discussing this as a general topic that could be used for a proper article, and the lack of any attempt to find them is just another indication of the present article's bias. DGG ( talk ) 20:01, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. With the POV material removed, it would seem perfectly noteworthy to have an article on Islamic destruction of Christian sites, which the article shows, is certainly happening, and the sites appear to be significant. Deathlibrarian (talk) 10:12, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment but we already have a non-biased version of this at Christianity and Islam, List_of_heritage_sites_damaged_during_the_Syrian_Civil_War, and Destruction of cultural heritage by ISIL . ThePlatypusofDoom (Talk) 11:58, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Obvious WP:SYNTH from WP:PRIMARY sources used to create an unnecessary WP:POVFORK of Destruction of cultural heritage by ISIL. - LuckyLouie (talk) 15:23, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Pr nominator, and previous voter, Huldra (talk) 20:04, 3 May 2016 (UTC) (I wonder what will be next, List of rapes committed by Mexicans? Huldra (talk) 20:05, 3 May 2016 (UTC))[reply]
Delete this article per WP:POVFORK, add the core content of it (Muslims hate Christians, Christians hate Muslims, they destroy each other's stuff, people on Wikipedia argue about it) in a less biased manner to Persecution of Christians, and create a redirect. That article already contains sufficient coverage of the "Muslim destruction of Christian history", both in historical terms and in modern context, and any gaps are filled in nicely by, as has been mentioned, Destruction of cultural heritage by ISIL and Christianity and Islam. Colonel Wilhelm Klink (^Complaints|_Mistakes) 00:52, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deletedid a 5 year old write this article? 1st grade project here? Delete. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.16.203.237 (talk) 07:47, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as essentially POV. Drmies (talk) 01:56, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The subject can have an article but I can't figure out a way to make an encyclopedic article. For now this article seems like a POV garbage (no offense). The creator should understand how WP:POV and WP:NPOV work, as well as WP:NOTE and bring serious sources and not WP:OR with news reports. This article is a blog, not a Wiki article and deleting it, apart from removing this unneeded text from Wikipedia, might change the attitude of the creator toward more productive editings.--Bolter21 (talk to me) 13:46, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as still questionable for anything suggesting its own article. SwisterTwister talk 06:33, 9 May 2016 (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.