Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Al-Huda Mosque

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Rossami (talk) 02:35, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Al-Huda Mosque

Delete. Not particularly ancient, not particularly large. The article makes no claim to notability - there must be a million places of worship like this around the world. Eixo 15:17, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

• Indeed, there seems to be many of them named "Al-Huda" as well. [1] but this is a perfectly good stub. Keep but be prepared to make this a WP:DAB. DoubleBlue (Talk) 15:35, 22 May 2005 (UTC)
• Week keep or merge into Mosques of Singapore. According to [2], it's one of at least 67 mosques in Singapore, so it quite possibly doesn't need its own article OTOH, it's perfectly valid information. Zocky 15:58, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

• PS: that should be List of mosques in Singapore. Eixo 06:45, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
  • Hmmm, these things should all be merged on one page (apart from the really notable ones, of course). Is it still called a list then? Zocky 07:01, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

• Keep, if there are only 67 mosques in Singapore wp can have articles for all of them. Failing that merge per Zocky. Kappa 18:45, 22 May 2005 (UTC)
  • Why do you think Singapore is special? Or are you planning on having an article for every single mosque on the entire planet? Better to merge them than to create a large number of small, abandoned articles. Average Earthman 22:07, 22 May 2005 (UTC)
    • How do you know it's been abandoned? It's only a day old. Kappa 23:42, 22 May 2005 (UTC)
      • No, I mean if we create articles on every single mosque on the planet, the sheer number involved would mean it was quite likely that the vast majority will not be regularly looked at, and could be vandalised without being noticed. Since mosques don't tend to move around much it would be better to group them together. Average Earthman 08:02, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
        • This is only one article. Kappa 22:52, 27 May 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, we plan on having an article on every church in the world? See what happens once the school inclusionists get their way? RickK 23:21, May 22, 2005 (UTC)
  • Accepting one article doesn't imply we plan on having articles on every other thing of that type. Kappa 23:42, 22 May 2005 (UTC)
    • So when you said above that there should be an article on all of the 67 mosques in Singapore, you didn't really mean it? RickK 04:41, May 23, 2005 (UTC)
      • I didn't use the word "should". Kappa 22:52, 27 May 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Neutrality^talk 03:27, May 23, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, not notable mosque. Megan1967 05:57, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, nn. Radiant_* 11:22, May 23, 2005 (UTC)
• delete nn MOSQUITOE Klonimus 06:42, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
  • Please don't make fun of other people's religion. Thank you. Zocky 07:01, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
• Delete nn as per Rick. JamesBurns 10:37, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
• Comment. It's curious to see some noted school inclusionists vote to delete a place of worship, but perhaps not surprising to see one do so in poor taste. Quale 19:19, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
• Delete non notable. Leanne 05:38, 25 May 2005 (UTC)
• Keep (I STARTED THIS PAGE) While I do agree with Eixo's comment as the Mosque has no relation to notability, I was under the impression that we are maintaining two separate lists, one for famous mosques and one for list of mosques I don’t see the need to break the list for now into lists by countries as the total number of mosques is not sufficient to do exactly that. I’m building a list of all Mosques worldwide on here User:CARPEDIEM does this mean we should only concentrate on famous mosques? Please comment. --NEWUSER|CARPEDIEM ^(talk) 17:24, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)
• Entry by User:Klonimus should be removed since it's against Wikipedia policy, calling a Mosque, MOSQUITO is very OFFENSIVE & RACIEST - this is Unacceptable - period! --NEWUSER|CARPEDIEM ^(talk) 17:34, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)

• I think everyone should just go easy on the PC here, the joke was harmless. In any case, how can a joke about Islam be "racist" (if that is indeed what you are trying to say)? I was under the impression that adherence to the religion of Islam was independent of race or ethnicity. Eixo 21:49, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Mocking people’s places of worship is a racist remark and it’s unacceptable. Trying to justify it, don’t change the fact his comment was offensive and racist. I’m certain if this was the case against other faith, it would have raised the roof. - Such remarks is in no way going to encourage people of all faith’s to contribute to the development of such great tool like Wikipedia. --NEWUSER|CARPEDIEM ^(talk) 22:51, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)

• No, you're wrong. If anyone were to make a pun on the word "church" (can't think of one right now) no one would raise an eyebrow. In the Muslim world there's an acceptance for abridging the freedom of speech that you won't find in the West, and that you shouldn't find in Wikipedia. Klonimus' comment should stand, and anyone who wants to criticize it should be free to do that. That’s how it works in a free society. Eixo 01:12, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Ok, I've got a few:

• churlch – a really vulgar church (like the Elvis wedding chapel in Las Vegas)
• churnch – a church where they make butter
• churpch – a church for birds
• Churac – a church where the priest decides to fire the deacon to appease the congregation, not realising it’s his guts they hate

That oughta raise the roof. Eixo 11:32, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• I was diaappointed to see Klonimus say that, but I'm sure in his mind he was just making a little joke, rather than being intentionally offensive. Kappa 23:08, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• It seems to me that "mosquito", as the diminuitive of "mosque", would be the term for a little mosque: ie. one that isn't big enough for an article. --Carnildo 00:22, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Ding Ding Ding. We have a Winner. I'm glad you got my reference. Mosquito is a spanish diminutive of fly, so a mosquito is a little mosque. I'm not against the inclusion of mosque's per se. But in order to get my vote, it would have to be shown that this Mosque is a notable Large Public Object. On a separate note, it's a bit saddening to see people get so fired up over anything that they conceive as being insulting to Islam. To some extent this is a microcosm of the hysteria that lead to 18 people getting killed in rioting over the unproven desecration of a Koran. Klonimus 10:08, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Comment: It's a good joke, but just for the record it's incorrect. The Spanish word for mosque is mezquita (from the Arabic masjid = "the place of prostration"). So mosquito would not be the Spanish diminutive for mosque. Eixo 13:31, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Comment:Klonimus has said far more offensive things than this little remark. I don't even know if he intended to offend people with it.Yuber^(talk) 22:13, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• It’s either people are very supportive of insulting Muslim's in the west that some try to come up with new definition to words to justify the racism behind it, or they are just uneducated – as far as the English language is concerned and this is the language used in the topic discussed here, not Spanish or Indian, English, the word used to identify a Mosque is very degrading and insulting to Muslims. MOSQUITO: two-winged insect whose female has a long proboscis to pierce the skin and suck the blood of humans and animals. - Mosquitos: are the members of the family Culicidae; these insects have a pair of scaled wings, a pair of halteres, a slender body, and long legs. The females of most mosquito species suck blood from other animals. Size varies but is rarely greater than 15 mm (0.6 inches). - There’s no justification for supporting racism as some people got out of there way to justify such indecent remark against a place of worship to Muslims. I must have completely failed to see that an INSECT is the WEST is the way to identify with Islamic places or worship – its even more saddening to see others justify such remarks. - I want no association with Wikipedia from this day forward since RACISM and OFFENSIVE remarks are justified and accepted by so called educated-people, rather then being corrected - Good luck to the non racist people. --NEWUSER|CARPEDIEM ^(talk) 12:27, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. Article fails to establish notability. --Carnildo 18:51, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.