Talk:List of Muslim Nobel Laureates

Comments

Where are the sources? To claim these people are muslim, without further clarifcation seems to be original research to me. What does Muslim mean here? Religious? Orthodox? Ethnic? Sjiiet? Sunnit? Also, lets just make lists of Transgender Nobel laureats and one of Nobel prize winners with blue eyes, while we're at it? -- Honorsteem (talk) 19:10, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Ignoring the less-sensible suggestions, Honorsteem raises a very important point. As the endless discussions regarding our List of Jewish Nobel laureates has indicated, proper sourcing over such matters is essential. And given that Islam is unequivocally a religion, WP:BLPCAT policy will apply: "Categories regarding religious beliefs... should not be used unless the subject has publicly self-identified with the belief... in question, and the subject's beliefs... are relevant to their public life or notability, according to reliable published sources". Given this requirement, it is possible that the list may be contrary to policy, and require deletion. AndyTheGrump (talk) 23:30, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

I agree. We can't be sure of the religion of anybody on this list and beyond that, what does it mean to be muslim? When Honorsteem talk about a list of Nobel laureates with blue eyes (I hope nobody actually creates such list), it would be a more objective inclusion criteria. For instance, Orhan Pamuk says that he is a "cultural muslim" (What is a cultural muslim? Who knows?). We should delete this list like we should delete List of Chinese Nobel laureates, Nobel laureates of India, List of Japanese Nobel laureates (which are redundant with the more neutral and more useful list by country) and any other similar list. Eleventh1 (talk) 08:01, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

To avoid WP:EGRS policy regarding religious beliefs, you re-phrase it born to 'Muslim communities' or 'from the Muslim world', which is something clearly verifiable, and could include 'Cultural Muslims'. The same can be done with some of the other lists. Avaya1 (talk) 00:28, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Islam is a religion, not an ethnicity - your suggested title doesn't really make sense to me. I'd also point out that WP:BLPCAT would still be a factor. AndyTheGrump (talk) 00:32, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

We already have similar articles like List of Muslim scientists. The criteria used here could be the same or we could loosen it by writing "from the Muslim community". Avaya1 (talk) 00:36, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Actually, I'd say it is the other way round - the 'similar articles' should comply with policy too. And I don't see how one could source 'from the Muslim community' anyway, without resorting to synthesis. AndyTheGrump (talk) 00:41, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

For people notable enough to win Nobel prizes, there are almost always sources stating what - if any - their religious background is. Most of the figures on this page have biographies published about them. Avaya1 (talk) 00:44, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

I'd imagine that biographic information is available for all Nobel laureates (though it may not say anything about their religion), however, unless their religion is relevant to their notability, it is questionable as to whether this list would meet WP:BLPCAT, even if sourced. The point is that winning a Nobel laureate is clearly notable, and the Islamic faith likewise, but is the intersection of the two notable? You might like to take a look at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_Jewish_Nobel_laureates, which closed as 'no consensus' in circumstances where the subject matter (Jewish Nobel laureates) had actually been discussed in several scholarly sources. I think to justify this list, you'd have at minimum to find similar sources, discussing 'Muslim Nobel laureates' as a topic. AndyTheGrump (talk) 01:10, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Given that you kept the above list, out of consistency I don't see how we can't keep this list. How can we justify having an article for one religion, and not all the others? It's clearly not the most notable article on wikipedia, but there are thousands of less notable articles that you should be nominating for deletion ahead of this one. I think the best thing for this article is to try to get the sources up to scratch, and look at the secondary literature, and then we can discuss it again afterwards. Avaya1 (talk) 01:37, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Firstly, 'Jewishness' isn't just a religion (if it was, a significant number of those included on the list wouldn't qualify), it is also an ethnicity: though who is 'Jewish' is often a controversial issue - there are differing criteria. And secondly, each Wikipedia article needs to be assessed on its own merits, rather than by comparison with others. As to whether the 'Jewish laureates' article is merited, this is questionable (and personally, I've argued that it isn't), but it does actually seem to have a bearing on an issue that has been discussed elsewhere - that people of Jewish descent are statistically over-represented amongst Nobel laureates. Again, as to why this is true, there are many theories - that the article in question doesn't do anything other than provide a raw (and contentious) list is a flaw in my opinion, but this is a subject that has been discussed elsewhere. To justify this list, one needs to demonstrate that there is something notable in the intersection between 'Nobel laureates' and 'Muslims' by finding sources that argue the same thing. Are there any? I'm not aware of any real discussion of the issue. While I've no doubt that Muslim Nobel laureates are deserving of their awards, the Nobel committee doesn't take religion into account when awarding prizes - and neither, for that matter, does the long and honourable tradition of Muslim scientific scholarship, which from its origins (which were to a notable extent, the origins of 'science' as we understand it) were concerned with the ideas of scientists as scientists, rather than as Muslims or non-Muslims. WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS isn't really the best argument for the existence of a list that tells us little about the individuals concerned, and nothing whatsoever about Islam. AndyTheGrump (talk) 04:36, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Do you have any problems with the source anymore?....User:Skashifakram(UTC)

GA nomination

I have removed the GA nomination as List class articles are not eligible for GA status. See Wikipedia:Good article criteria#What is not a good article? You may wish to nominate at WP:FLC Jezhotwells (talk) 12:19, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

As you said, I have nominated the article for WP:FLC.Thank You very much.--Skashifakram (talk) 12:59, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to edit

I welcome all to make a better representation of the images here.Thank You.--Skashifakram (talk) 19:52, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

can someone create a group file of Muslim Nobel Laureates

Regarding image

The image is the only image to be found about the book across wikipedia,please don't delete this.--Skashifakram (talk) 10:40, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

The book has its own articles. We allow non-free images of title pages in dedicated articles about a book, but we then don't re-include the image in other pages where the book is merely mentioned as part of a list. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:21, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

I have created a newer version of the file with far lower resolution to avoid strict copyright problem and as a creator of the image, I am using this in the article.--Skashifakram (talk) 11:52, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Nope, that won't work either. Still fails NFCC#8: There simply is no need for us to see an image of the book cover in order to understand this list. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:55, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Well,but why did you then delete Salam picture,that was even more important--Skashifakram (talk) 11:57, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Same reason: we don't use non-free images in lists. People who want to know what he looked like can go to his dedicated article. Also, neither of these images had a proper Fair Use Rationale spelled out for this article. (But don't go now and try writing one: it will be futile.) Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:00, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

I am not going to write one.I was wrong,you are not as bad as I thought!--Skashifakram (talk) 12:15, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

File:Banker to the poor4.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Banker to the poor4.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 11 April 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Banker to the poor4.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 14:57, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

== Abdus Salam == Abdus Salam is not a muslim. May I remove him? Franp9am (talk) 21:51, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Clarification

The comment regarding Orhan Pamuk being the first and only Turk to receive a noble should be clarified as Tawakkul Karman is an Arab with origins in modern day Turkey, and received Turkish citizenship after being awarded the noble peace prize. See http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/Default.aspx?pageID=238&nid=32246 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grant bud (talk • contribs) 19:18, 4 August 2013 (UTC)