Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Diogenes in Islam

: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. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 21:35, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

=[[Diogenes in Islam]]=

:{{la|Diogenes in Islam}} ([{{fullurl:Diogenes in Islam|wpReason={{urlencode: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Diogenes in Islam}}&action=delete}} delete]) – (View AfD)(View log)

This is a POV essay which exists solely to promote a viewpoint which is controversial. It is also an orphan article suspiciously not linked from any other articles on the subject. On cursory inspection, nothing in the articles on Jesus, Jesus in Islam, Al-Ghazali or Diogenes of Sinope suggests that this viewpoint is widely held. The references are of mixed quality and I am not sure if they really support the argument or not. I must admit to not reading them all in detail. If this viewpoint does have significant traction then a more neutral article on it may be justified or it could just be covered in other articles. DanielRigal (talk) 22:34, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Delete: Undue weight given to a minority viewpoint, along with a strong essay-style wording. Original research, particulary on the third and fourth sections.--Darius (talk) 23:48, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Delete not encyclopedic; what each religion's views of people not associated with it would be a POV muddle of unencyclopedic OR. Ready for George Bush in Discordianism? Carlossuarez46 (talk) 02:26, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

::To be fair to the author, I think he is alleging an association, albeit a very strange one. Assuming I understand his strange phrasing and terminology correctly, he is claiming that the Islamic prophet Isa is actually Diogenes not Jesus. That would be very notable if the connection made any sense, could be proved or gained mainstream acceptance. Of course, this is where it falls down. --DanielRigal (talk) 14:16, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

:::It's difficult to discern what is being alleged in the article, but if there were some (minority but notable theory) linking of Diogenes with Isa, isn't Isa the place where it belongs? Carlossuarez46 (talk) 17:03, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

::::Either that and/or Diogenes of Sinope, yes. It would need to be a reasonably large and well researched subject before it got its own article. As it stands I am not even convinced it deserves a mention anywhere. I wasn't defending the article, just making sure that when we delete it we do so for the right reasons. --DanielRigal (talk) 17:54, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. —DanielRigal (talk) 14:23, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. —DanielRigal (talk) 16:11, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 01:20, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Delete per WP:NOR, since the references cited do not discuss the asserted connection between Diogenes of Sinope and Al-Ghazali. The Nordic Goddess Kristen ^{Worship her} 01:37, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
Delete It appears to be original research. Pastor Theo (talk) 01:48, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
Delete as original research. Drmies (talk) 04:47, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

: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.