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. --Core desat 06:45, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Islamic Inquisition

[edit]

Delete as a neologism. It is also pretty clear that the page was created to push a POV hence violating WP:NOT a soapbox. Jersey Devil 11:13, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - neologism, original research, OR synthesis, created obviously to POV-push. Moreschi ^{Request a recording?} 11:15, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, media neologism. Pavel Vozenilek 11:34, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Soapboxing. I've noticed a strange phenomenon among Wikipedia articles where if one religion has a particular feature, every other religion has to have that feature in the interests of "balance". Expect an article on Zen Buddhist Jihad any day now. I feel a Wiki-essay "List of Protestant Popes" coming on. --Folantin 11:40, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as OR and POV-pushing. Hut 8.5 12:29, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:SOAPBOX. To call any form of minority persecution in Islam "inquisition" is an attempt to whitewash institutionalized persecution of religious deviants and non-catholics. To the contrary of other religions that had short and very local persecutions "inquisition" is something that existed for about 8 centuries encouraging the persecution of believers in other faiths. Alf^Photoman 15:41, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Remove link from Inquisition page. -- Infrogmation 17:30, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as a slightly bizarre POV page. -- Chairman S. Talk ^Contribs 21:29, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom - Ozzykhan 14:01, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Can the page be protected from recreation, seeing how its been deleted twice before? - Ozzykhan 14:03, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Answer: Yes, it is possible that the page can be protected from recreation. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Protected_deleted_pages

- Kernel_NickM 7:18, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

restore, There is no 'political aim' behind creating the page, the phenomenon is huge, that it's unfair to ignore it in a encyclopedia, it's a wave, a movement.

To: Ozzykhan 14, It was never deleted (as far to my knowledge)! PS Criticizing radicals is in no way an "attack" anyone. Historianism 07:11, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: See deletion log: [1] Ozzykhan 14:13, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Neologism. --Sa.vakilian(t-c) 10:23, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. --pIrish 17:39, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as indiscriminate collection of facts. I know that they are all related to Islam, but there is no attempt to show what the connections are, how these events are related. Is this just a list of things Muslims have done to non-Muslims? Smmurphy^(Talk) 22:02, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and rewrite Seems to have some notability, but article clarly needs work--Sefringle 04:29, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Smmurphy.Proabivouac 04:41, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete original research. Beit Or 21:15, 22 March 2007 (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.