Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tablighi Jamaat and allegations of terrorism: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 12: Line 12:
::Thanks GeoSwan for your thoughtful response. Regarding the points you've made, the name [[Allegations that Tablighi Jamaat has ties to terrorism]] has the same problem regarding the [[WP:ALLEGED]] guideline (who is making this allegation?). Regarding your second point, I'm puzzled by how "the allegation of a tie to Tablighi Jamaat" might have been "the most serious allegation" for some of the Guantanamo captives. Tablighi Jamaat is a large movement--for example according to the main wiki article on the topic, 40% of UK mosques are Tablighi Jamaat. So, I'm very skeptical that simply "having a tie" to Tablighi Jaamat would represent a "serious allegation." Also, my rationale for deletion is that this article is a negative content fork on the subject of Tablighi Jaamat. Thanks,[[User:CordeliaNaismith|CordeliaNaismith]] ([[User talk:CordeliaNaismith|talk]]) 18:33, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
::Thanks GeoSwan for your thoughtful response. Regarding the points you've made, the name [[Allegations that Tablighi Jamaat has ties to terrorism]] has the same problem regarding the [[WP:ALLEGED]] guideline (who is making this allegation?). Regarding your second point, I'm puzzled by how "the allegation of a tie to Tablighi Jamaat" might have been "the most serious allegation" for some of the Guantanamo captives. Tablighi Jamaat is a large movement--for example according to the main wiki article on the topic, 40% of UK mosques are Tablighi Jamaat. So, I'm very skeptical that simply "having a tie" to Tablighi Jaamat would represent a "serious allegation." Also, my rationale for deletion is that this article is a negative content fork on the subject of Tablighi Jaamat. Thanks,[[User:CordeliaNaismith|CordeliaNaismith]] ([[User talk:CordeliaNaismith|talk]]) 18:33, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
:::Who is making the allegations? Western security officials, security officials in Totalitarian Islamic countries, pundits who are suspicious of muslims, in general. The article was renamed to [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tablighi_Jamaat_and_allegations_of_terrorism&diff=140927148&oldid=140903599 Tablighi Jamaat and allegations of terrorism by U.S intelligence] about six months after it was created. IIRC it Jossi's name was restored following a discussion at requested moves. [[User:Geo Swan|Geo Swan]] ([[User talk:Geo Swan|talk]]) 19:52, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
:::Who is making the allegations? Western security officials, security officials in Totalitarian Islamic countries, pundits who are suspicious of muslims, in general. The article was renamed to [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tablighi_Jamaat_and_allegations_of_terrorism&diff=140927148&oldid=140903599 Tablighi Jamaat and allegations of terrorism by U.S intelligence] about six months after it was created. IIRC it Jossi's name was restored following a discussion at requested moves. [[User:Geo Swan|Geo Swan]] ([[User talk:Geo Swan|talk]]) 19:52, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
:::Yes, the suspicions an association with TJ trigger '''''are''''' puzzling. Nevertheless they do trigger those suspicions, in some quarters, as you can see from [[Mana Shaman Allabardi al Tabi]]'s [http://projects.nytimes.com/guantanamo/detainees/588-mana-shaman-allabardi-al-tabi allegations memos], among others. I think, in his particular case, the TJ allegation was the one the DoD considered the most serious. [[User:Geo Swan|Geo Swan]] ([[User talk:Geo Swan|talk]]) 20:04, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Revision as of 20:04, 19 December 2010

Tablighi Jamaat and allegations of terrorism

Tablighi Jamaat and allegations of terrorism (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I'm sorry to nominate an article for deletion that it looks like someone has put a good bit of work into, but this article just does not seem to be on an encyclopedic topic. Even the title of the article is a violation of the MOS guideline WP:ALLEGED--who has asserted that Tablighi Jamaat is connected to terrorism? The article doesn't say. There is one reference, an article in the Middle Eastern Quarterly, that does indeed make such an assertion, but one reference from what our Wiki article on MEQ calls "a publication of an American conservative think tank" will not a neutral article on "Tablighi Jamaat and allegations of terrorism" make. The long list at the end of the article of "Terrorist suspects alleged to have links to Tablighi Jamaat" is WP:SYNTH. Tablighi Jamaat is a large movement; of course it will have some members who are convicted of crimes. Should we have an article on, say, "Anglicanism and allegations of drug-dealing," containing a list of all of the people who have ever belonged to an Anglican church and later been convicted of drug-dealing? I think this article should be deleted, since it's essentially a negative POV-fork of the main article on the movement. CordeliaNaismith (talk) 16:40, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • WRT the name -- I agree the article's basename should have been made clear it was addressing allegations.
    1. When I started this article I started it under the name Allegations that Tablighi Jamaat has ties to terrorism. Administrator User:Jossi arbitrarily renamed it.
    2. A concern over an article's name is not grounds for deletion.
    3. Due to Jossi's rename the previous (procedural) {{afd}} was obfuscated: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Allegations that Tablighi Jamaat has ties to terrorism. Geo Swan (talk) 17:08, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • WRT comparisons to Anglicanism -- The nomination asks "Should we have an article on, say, 'Anglicanism and allegations of drug-dealing,' containing a list of all of the people who have ever belonged to an Anglican church and later been convicted of drug-dealing?" This is a straw argument. No one disputes that a very small minority of Anglicans have dealt drugs. But no one is suggesting that being an Anglican should automatically put an individual of being a drug-dealer or terrorist. Individuals are automatically falling under suspicion of ties to terrorism, in part, due to an alleged association to terrorism. For some of the Guantanamo captives the allegation of a tie to Tablighi Jamaat was the most serious allegation. Three Guantanamo captives died in custody on June 10, 2006. At the time the DoD claimed they were very dangerous men, committed terrorists. In September 2007, when the memos prepared for their review Boards were made public one of these men turned out to be one of the individuals for whom the most serious allegation was that he had a tie to the Tablighi Jamaat movement. Geo Swan (talk) 18:01, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks GeoSwan for your thoughtful response. Regarding the points you've made, the name Allegations that Tablighi Jamaat has ties to terrorism has the same problem regarding the WP:ALLEGED guideline (who is making this allegation?). Regarding your second point, I'm puzzled by how "the allegation of a tie to Tablighi Jamaat" might have been "the most serious allegation" for some of the Guantanamo captives. Tablighi Jamaat is a large movement--for example according to the main wiki article on the topic, 40% of UK mosques are Tablighi Jamaat. So, I'm very skeptical that simply "having a tie" to Tablighi Jaamat would represent a "serious allegation." Also, my rationale for deletion is that this article is a negative content fork on the subject of Tablighi Jaamat. Thanks,CordeliaNaismith (talk) 18:33, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Who is making the allegations? Western security officials, security officials in Totalitarian Islamic countries, pundits who are suspicious of muslims, in general. The article was renamed to Tablighi Jamaat and allegations of terrorism by U.S intelligence about six months after it was created. IIRC it Jossi's name was restored following a discussion at requested moves. Geo Swan (talk) 19:52, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the suspicions an association with TJ trigger are puzzling. Nevertheless they do trigger those suspicions, in some quarters, as you can see from Mana Shaman Allabardi al Tabi's allegations memos, among others. I think, in his particular case, the TJ allegation was the one the DoD considered the most serious. Geo Swan (talk) 20:04, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]