Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christianophobia in

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, merge and rename as provided by Metropolitan. ÷seresin 01:55, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Christianophobia in...

Articles

(View log) First 4 articles have no content other than a definition. Given the context, the reference for the article is probably not a reliable source. The article itself is debatedly POV pushing. In the case of Christianophobia in England appears to be POV pushing, for example it ignores the fact that the complaint to the ASA against the Gay Police Officers Association was only upheld in Part. Secondly, the highly partisan Daily Mail is not a reliable source on these issues (if not most political issues). Life-Site News appears to be even more partisan. Pit-yacker (talk) 18:01, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I started these articles but have not had time to add more to them yet and the one I have put most into is 'Christianophobia in England'. I see a need for all the articles as there are loads of examples available that illustrate anti-christian discrimination. If there are problems with using references from the Daily Mail, I will use others as well - are you happy with stories reported by the BBC? FYI, I also intend to write articles about Islamophobia in the UK. Cheers Fishiehelper2 (talk) 18:32, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment partly in reply to your posts here and on my talk page. First of all, I think the suggestions of Metropolitan90 would be a start. However, I think there may be fundamental issue as to whether an article entitled Anti-Christian sentiment in the United Kingdom which basically consists of a list of anecdotes carried in the press could ever be NPOV. The concept that a lot of these stories, even if we do take them at face value are "anti-Christian" is precisely a *point of view*, let alone that taken together they show the existence of an ingrained "anti-Christian" culture in the UK.

The problem with taking them at face value and the reason I particularly question the use of some sources, is that these stories also have a habit of melting away into nothing when you dig a little further. A quick Google of "Havering London Hospital Paintings" reveals [1] and [2] which suggest amongst other things all religious buildings were banned, along with other images (such as babies) in sensitive areas.

Equally, I don't see that a commercial bank refusing to do with business a single Christian group (Christian Voice) can be seen as "anti-Christian". It would be correct to say the move might be seen as Anti-"Christian Voice", but that isn't the title of the article, and if we want to start an "anti-Christian Voice" article we could start with a great deal of criticism of the organisation from the mainstream churches in the UK - including a quite conservative former arch-Bishop of Canterbury who alluded to them bullying various organisations and companies.

Pit-yacker (talk) 19:10, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete them all or at least userfy, combine and rename. The anecdotes listed in the England article are only "phobia" like responses when viewed from your POV. Maybe discrimination, but I see no way that the name of the articles can remain as is without being completely POV. That being said I think it will be very very difficult to write balanced articles at all. I suggest working on existing articles. Beach drifter (talk) 18:44, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Christianophobia in Scotland, Christianophobia in Wales, and Christianophobia in Northern Ireland due to lack of any substantive content whatsoever. Merge Christianophobia in England into Christianophobia in the United Kingdom because there is no indication that there will be enough content to justify separate articles for the constituent countries of the UK. Then rename Christianophobia in the United Kingdom to Anti-Christian sentiment in the United Kingdom to avoid the use of a neologism in the title. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:01, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and rename acccording to Metropolitan90; there is not content to justify separate articles. One strong article is better. DGG (talk) 04:12, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, merge, & rename per Metropolitan90's suggestion. Anti-Christian_sentiment should be able to handle the material without forks. Athanasius • Quicumque vult 20:29, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Of the one article with content that could be merged, of four examples three are not Christophobia - one is about an extremist homophobic group (described as such in a UK broadsheet) called Christian Voice, one is about complaints against the GPA and was investigated by the CPS, but found insufficent evidence to mount a case, and one was about an allegation by a teacher who did not want to attend compulsory diversity training that would be necessary to work with a range of people and children who fall outside hetersoexuality, and in the report is still under investigation. The leaves one, and from the report it is hard to say what that is about. That leaves about three sources, of which two discuss the neologism - one from an MP and one from outside the UK (Europe). Does one solid quote by an MP expressing his opinion and one example that in itself is tenuous warrant an article here, let alone four or five? Negative reactions to Christianity tend to be for spefic reasons - religious differences, or attitudes towards minorities based on sexual or gender identity, or because of scnadals where Christians have abused positions of power or authority. Because these sorts of phobias (i.e. that are not neuroses, e.g. xenophobia, homophobia, transphobia) are rooted in irrational fear and expressed through discrimination, it is not clear that apart from one, these examples would fall within the scope of the article. Mish (just an editor) (talk) 23:01, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into the Christianophobia in the United Kingdom article which looks like a disambiguation page but isn't needed as 3 of the articles it links to have no content. That said, I think the issue is worthy of an article, though I think it would be fair to add a section pointing out criticism of the use of the term. 86.165.94.221 (talk) 07:25, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep would be my preferred choice but maybe Merge would be best for now since some articles have nothing in them. Maybe if they grow they can become separate again. 86.156.2.58 (talk) 18:28, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Changed to Delete and merge as Anti-Christian sentiment in the UK, with questionable content removed (such as Christian Voice), as this is not a well established term. Mish (just an editor) (talk) 21:06, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep All It seems apparent that the articles' issues can be dealt with by normal editing - cleanup, merger, rename, etc. Such action is consistent with our editing policy and so deletion is not appropriate. Colonel Warden (talk) 19:51, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and merge as Anti-Christian ... as others suggest. Christianophobia is an awful neologism that isn't even in Wiktionary yet.Polargeo (talk) 12:20, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I do not see how, at least right now, how any substantial articles could be written, even if the POV is removed. UK is a Christian nation. Bearian (talk) 17:29, 22 June 2009 (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.