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 that I have Speedy deleted this article. The name and format of this list are inherently divisive and offensive. Lists of criminals or alleged criminals broken down by their religious background (or lack of such background) are unacceptable. Newyorkbrad 21:52, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of Muslims involved in a crime[edit]

List of Muslims involved in a crime (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

The article is an OR list of individuals, see WP:NOT#INDISCRIMINATE. There is no significant notable reason for trying to list all Muslims who have committed a crime as there is nothing special about this pairing. Abnn 20:07, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is it OR to list Mohamed Atta in this list? Similiarly for all other individuals. All names included in this list have been sourced.--Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 20:41, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as nom. Someone blanked my earlier vote saying that nominators can't vote. I haven't read this policy, thus I would appreciate having it pointed out to me. And please do not simply blank my vote, if there is policy against it, as it is just as easy to offset it. --Abnn 21:32, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep 90% of the people on the list have citations, so it is not WP:OR. Only one section lacks sources, and that section has some. This is a new article, created today, and it has the potential to improve.--Sefringle 20:12, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment It is the creation of the list, the bringing together of these individuals into one list, is the OR, the SYNTH. --Abnn 20:13, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. All individuals the individuals that are listed are notable for their crimes, and everything seems to have proper citations. -- Karl Meier 20:13, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete It does not matter if the list containt notable persons or not. It name itself violates WP:POINT. Do not wikipedia a place where your do original research by creating list of your choices. --- A. L. M. 20:15, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment It is a sourced list--Sefringle 20:16, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as a needless fork. the above Keep !votes miss the crux of the nominator's assertions. ITAQALLAH 20:16, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletions. ITAQALLAH 20:17, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment No, we misunderstood nothing. The nominator said it is origional research, and it clearly is not.--Sefringle 20:20, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The key problem with this list is that it is a non-significant pairing and that it is being used to further a WP:POINT. --Abnn 20:28, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And what point is that? How is List of Muslim philosophers not proving a point? --Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 20:40, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

you can find plenty of academic works discussing the topic of Muslim philosophers. can you find any discussing the topic of 'Muslims involved in a crime'? ITAQALLAH 20:54, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since when did that become a requirement in order to create a list? --Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 20:59, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

see the nominator's comments. ITAQALLAH 21:09, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Move to List of Islamist terrorists and remove unrelated content. Listing people like Tawana Brawley and Mike Tyson alongside those whose crimes were motivated by their religious beliefs (indeed, Tyson wasn't even a Muslim when he was convicted) is, per nom, pretty random.Proabivouac 20:21, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think it would be better to just seperate the people by crime.--Sefringle 20:23, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Then the list be very, very long, as various crimes are committed in Majority Muslim countries all the time; just as anywhere else, sometimes their perpetrators are notable.Proabivouac 20:30, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have re-organized the list slightly to seperate terrorists from the others. Would it be better to add the word "notable"?--Sefringle 20:36, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, notable will be a good inclusion. --Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 20:38, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete WP:NOT - this list would be endless. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Fredrick day (talk • contribs) 20:33, 13 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

• Keep: This is not a "POV Fork". If so, what about these lists? All these lists are valuable as research tools:

• List of Muslim scholars
• List of Muslim philosophers
• List of Muslim comparative religionists
• List of Muslim historians
• List of Muslims by date of birth
• List of Muslim businesspeople
• List of Muslim Nobel laureates
• List of Muslim theologians
• List of Muslim military leaders
• List of Muslim politicians
• List of Muslim artists
• List of Muslim athletes
• List of Muslim entertainers
• List of Muslim mathematicians
• List of Muslim writers and poets

This is also not OR. Each name on this list is sourced. Is there any disagreement over whether Osama Bin Laden and Mohamed Atta should be on this list? When you have List of Muslim writers and poets, what is wrong with List of Muslims involved in a crime? --Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 20:37, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Move per Proabivouac's point. Some of these crimes have to do with the criminals' religious beliefs, but others are entirely unrelated. It doesn't make sense to list Islamic terrorists alongside other criminals who just happen to be Muslim. The title of the article implies that there's something called "Muslim crime," which just isn't really the case. Switchercat ^talk_cont 20:40, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Both this and List of Christians involved in a crime would be a very long list indeed. FCYTravis 21:03, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: If you haven't noticed, this is a list of notable individuals only. -- Karl Meier 21:09, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• As I said, it would be a very long list indeed. If this is kept, I will start building the List of notable Christians involved in a crime. FCYTravis 21:10, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Create whatever you want, but please stop wasting our time telling us about it here. That is not the topic of our discussion, unless there is some WP:POINT you want to make? Anyway, that a list is long is not a reason for not having it. Wikipedia has many long lists and articles. Take a look for at List of Jewish Nobel laureates for example. -- Karl Meier 21:28, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Unless you think calling Osama a terrorist is origional research, even the worst policy wonk wouldn't see this article as OR--RCT 21:13, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Is there an article called "List of Jews involved in a crime", or "List of Hindus involved in a crime"?? This is clearly discriminating against Muslims.Bless sins 21:19, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I don't see the point of this article. Muslim philosophers, Muslim scholars, Muslim mathematicians,and Muslim military leaders are the subject of many books and articles. Has there ever been a notable publication that seriously discusses the crimes Muslim commit?Bless sins 21:23, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. The title is inherently OR and unencyclopedic. If someone made an article called List of Jews involved in a crime, it would probably be speedy deleted, and rightly so. This is no different. *** Crotalus *** 21:24, 13 May 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.