Talk:Love jihad conspiracy theory: Difference between revisions
Reverted to revision 321690730 by Jake Wartenberg; wiki is not a SOAPBOX for catholic church. (TW) |
Edits reverted |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
The article is not neutral as it has some [[WP:OR | original research]] [[WP:synth | synthesised]] to promote a case - the sources mostly talk about a court case and allegation by some organizations about "Love Jihad", but there is no other reference about the existence of such an organization or its "activity" as it is put in the article. [[User:Zencv | Zencv]]<sup>[[User talk:Zencv#top | Lets discuss]]</sup> 09:08, 17 October 2009 (UTC) |
The article is not neutral as it has some [[WP:OR | original research]] [[WP:synth | synthesised]] to promote a case - the sources mostly talk about a court case and allegation by some organizations about "Love Jihad", but there is no other reference about the existence of such an organization or its "activity" as it is put in the article. [[User:Zencv | Zencv]]<sup>[[User talk:Zencv#top | Lets discuss]]</sup> 09:08, 17 October 2009 (UTC) |
||
== Edits reverted== |
|||
I reverted several edits from [[User:Yusuf.Abdullah]] as it violated a number of core WP policies - a section named "Modus Operandi" was linked to a single primary source(ie, http://thatsmalayalam.oneindia.in/news/2009/10/16/love-jihad-kcbc-social-harmony-father-johney-kochuparambil.pdf), that too in Malayalam, not in English!. Another section titled "Similar incidents" contained incidents of "forced conversion" which do not belong here as you cannot synthesise that these have anthing to do with alleged "Love Jihad" activity in South India. Lastly, a section titled " |
|||
Further Reading" is a clear nonsense - [[WP:Soapbox | WP is not a soapbox]] for propaganda purpose by Bishop's Council or anything. The reference was in Malayalam, linked to a circular from the primary source and WP doesnt work that way. If you want to add a sentence, please look for a source in English linked to a reliable source. [[User:Zencv | Zencv]]<sup>[[User talk:Zencv#top | Lets discuss]]</sup> 22:33, 26 October 2009 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 22:33, 26 October 2009
 | This article was nominated for deletion on 17 October 2009 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep. |
I just wonder How SOMEONE can find unreality in this matter. Even a simple google search can give enough links. If Love Jihad is a HOAX, Its a notable hoax.
Neutrality and Notability
I believe the article doesn't satisfy notability guidelines as WP is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Having a few newsreports(even if they are from reliable sources) do not warrant a separate article.
The article is not neutral as it has some original research synthesised to promote a case - the sources mostly talk about a court case and allegation by some organizations about "Love Jihad", but there is no other reference about the existence of such an organization or its "activity" as it is put in the article. Zencv Lets discuss 09:08, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Edits reverted
I reverted several edits from User:Yusuf.Abdullah as it violated a number of core WP policies - a section named "Modus Operandi" was linked to a single primary source(ie, http://thatsmalayalam.oneindia.in/news/2009/10/16/love-jihad-kcbc-social-harmony-father-johney-kochuparambil.pdf), that too in Malayalam, not in English!. Another section titled "Similar incidents" contained incidents of "forced conversion" which do not belong here as you cannot synthesise that these have anthing to do with alleged "Love Jihad" activity in South India. Lastly, a section titled " Further Reading" is a clear nonsense - WP is not a soapbox for propaganda purpose by Bishop's Council or anything. The reference was in Malayalam, linked to a circular from the primary source and WP doesnt work that way. If you want to add a sentence, please look for a source in English linked to a reliable source. Zencv Lets discuss 22:33, 26 October 2009 (UTC)