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 of the debate was delete all articles. Mailer Diablo 02:15, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This article, and the other two that follow, are about trivial subjects that have no encyclopedic meaning. Given that Islam is considered a dīn (way of life) rather than a simple religion, we could connect Islam with practically any topic. But we don't need an article about Islamic shopping, Islamic space travel, and Islamic web-surfing just because some (trivial) relationship exists between Islam and those respective subjects. But we shouldn't. In the same way we don't have Hindu entertainment or Jewish entertainment, we should not have Islamic entertainment, etc. joturner 04:25, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as nominator. joturner 04:29, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as per nom., unless someone can find examples of Islamic comedy, movies or entertainment Green Giant 04:36, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment after the debate yesterday about muslim and islamic lists and so forth, I've decided that I'm not touching this with a 10 foot barge poll. There should probably be some official policy governing what makes an article significant when the subject already has an article but this one gives it particlar emphasis on religion. There is no Christian entertainment, nor is there a Jewish entertainment article. Bobby1011 04:49, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There's a fairly substantial article about Christian music. Phr 04:56, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There's also a fairly substantial article about Muslim music, which really should be moved to Islamic music. joturner 05:14, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete without prejudice I could imagine an encyclopedic article about Islamic entertainment that would be appropriate to keep, like the existing extensive article about Bollywood. It could also discuss related cultural issues like the prohibition of music under the Afghan Taliban. But the current stub isn't worth keeping. Phr 04:51, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Don't create an aritcle until you have something to say. savidan^{(talk) (e@)} 05:34, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Islamic Music. pschemp | talk 06:34, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Why is this not ((db-empty))? The article says nothing about the subject. The author should use the Sandbox to develop their ideas before publishing an article of this type.  (aeropagitica)  07:28, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as empty. OhNoitsJamie^Talk 08:20, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• speedy delete All of these islam articles have no content, just links to each other.
• Delete all without prejudice due to lack of content. For example, I can certainly conceive of there being Muslim comedians who write their humor in such a way as to comply with Sharia, but so far these articles don't say anything informative about these subjects. --Metropolitan90 08:54, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Islamic entertainment and Islamic movies due to lack of content. Keep Islamic comedy as rewritten since it now has a reasonable amount of content. --Metropolitan90 03:24, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and expand. Entertainment in Islam is very common and notable. There is potential for this article to grow. --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 09:35, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Siva1979. This is a stub. Remeber what a stub is?--Striver 13:06, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom and savidan, but don't hold this AfD against any future article that actually has some content. Turnstep 13:34, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all per Joturner and savidan. Pepsidrinka 14:01, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all as neologisms. No evidence that these terms have any usage in relation to the intended subject matter. If it can be sourced that there are established genres of "Islamic Comedy" et al, I will reconsider... but I live in an area that is heavily populated with muslims and I've never heard this term used... that doesn't mean it doesn't exist, but I need to see it sourced.--Isotope23 17:59, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all per Savidan, Isotope23. Sandstein 21:13, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above. Arundhati Bakshi (talk • contribs) 02:47, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Islamic comedy is now updated, and no longer a empty stub, as it was when nominated, and all above votes where cast.

In other words, all votes regarding this particular article need to be re-evaluated. However, the article itself needs heavy editing before it can be called a good, or even ok article. --Striver 03:17, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I'll reconsider on the Islamic comedy article, I'm still not convinced this isn't a neologism; I've never heard Mullah Nasrudin referred to as an Islamic comedian before this article. Give me some time to read through the sourcing though before I make a final decision. It needs a cleanup for sure if kept.--Isotope23 14:37, 23 February 2006 (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.