Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Differences between islam and the bahai faith

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. Randykitty (talk) 13:32, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Differences between islam and the bahai faith

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This entire article seems like WP:OR/WP:SYNTH. Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 18:49, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - WP:OR. PhantomTech (talk) 21:50, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - whether what is there now is OR (yes) or over reliance on primary sources (yes) I think think there is a significant amount of reliable sources on the matter. Delete unless reliable sources can be brought to bear beyond primary sources. --Smkolins (talk) 00:17, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Not only WP:OR, but totally promotional. -- Jeff3000 (talk) 03:42, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:55, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:55, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I've looked through JSTOR and there's likely enough sources for an article on Bahai-Islamic relations, however this article as it stands has serious POV issues (the claim of the first sentence is a heavily disputed one), as well has the aforementioned WP:OR, and WP:SYNTH issues. Probably best to just blow it up and start over at a later point. Will be willing to change to support if someone substantially rewrites the entire article. Bosstopher (talk) 10:38, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I just imagined an encyclopedia full of "The difference between..." articles, about religions, or political parties, or pornographic actresses,and each article the subject of bitter conflict. Please, no. NebY (talk) 19:52, 12 March 2015 (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.