This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was DELETE. Postdlf 02:19, 20 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Apart from this being one of the worst formatted articles I've come across, it is basically a list of things someone sees as how others see Islam, and how wrong they are. No references, no proof, sweeping generalisations. This is the POV equivalent of walking through a minefield and deliberately jumping up and down to make a point. Harro5 10:14, July 12, 2005 (UTC)

• Delete as per above. Benna 10:24, 12 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete an attempt to create a biased article whilst Islamophobia remains protected. Germen did something similar when he attempted to create the Islamophilia article. This sort of attempt to disrupt Wikipedia to make a point should not really be tolerated. Axon 10:32, 12 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as per above. I just started to write the article. It is just a stub now. --Germen 10:34, 12 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Islamophilia all over again -- or something like it. gren 11:37, 12 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as per above. 216.209.18.78 12:06, 12 July 2005 (UTC) 8:04, 12 July 2005 (Canada)[reply]
• Redirect to Islamophobia _{altough I doubt many people would type in that title}, Delete, or Total Rewrite to be in any way shape or form encyclopedic. --Irishpunktom\^talk 13:08, July 12, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete: POV-pushing junk. —Charles P. (Mirv) 13:14, 12 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Friday 14:59, 12 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, POV fork of Islamophobia as discussion there should make clear. User should be sanctioned. Dcarrano 15:36, July 12, 2005 (UTC)
  • Perhaps it is worth saying that the article creator has just been blocked for 24 hours for vandalism by either removing the VfD tag or moving it to the bottom of the article, in contravention of deletion policy. David | Talk 15:39, 12 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete both, needless POV fork, and nothing but a subheader farm to boot (how odd!). -- BD2412 ^talk 17:59, July 12, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Absolutely nothing salvageable. Just lists of alleged prejudices held by unspecified people regarding Islam. Both consist almost entirely of headers; no content. — Gwalla | Talk 22:08, 12 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Is there a Prejudice (christian)? No? Interesting. As currently written, borders nonsense, certainly inherently POV. Xoloz 04:07, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete an inherently POV fork devoid of encyclopedic content. JamesBurns 04:40, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect Over to Islamophobia or else create a new article on the subject of Islamic prejudice starting with the whole issue of the Kuffar and Dhimmi in Islam. 24.60.163.16 05:19, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I especially love this line "Muslims are homosexuals". This person didn't even TRY to make it encyclopedic.Heraclius 13:01, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, of course. - Mustafaa 13:17, 13 July 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.