489:
for/against such lists is merely a reflection of differences among editors. But it does no harm to WP to have the lists present, and does not violate WP:NPOV. Let them all remain and be useful to those who wish to use them. WP:SYN is being used as an excuse to get rid of them, but lists are by their nature highly resistant to synthesis, since they
696:: No objections in principle to merging, but I would question the practicality. The size of this particular list is quite long already, and has 480 references. I can't say it makes sense to make a Winnebago list (throw in everything including the kitchen sink), just in order to keep the number of lists down.
868:
the atheists and other religions. Nobel Prizes are so significant that a number of rules that apply elsewhere do not apply to them. Religion may well be irrelevant in the case of the scientific Nobel prizes, but quite significant in the motivation of the winner for the literature and peace prizes,
819:
Not only because it is hard to argue to delete this one when we have lists for Muslim, Jewish and Hindu laureates (I'm pretty sure there have been
Japanese - presumably Buddhist laureats as well) but faith-by-birth or culture may not be as unrelated as Jayron32 and others assert, at least, not if we
511:
The lists for other religions and for atheists should also be restored. This is not a trivial intersection. As an analogy, consider lists of Nobel laureates by country. Nationality is arguably less important than religion, but, for example, the number of German Nobel laureates dropped abruptly after
517:
Articles are supposed to be deleted as a last resort when they cannot be improved. If some of the laureates do not have a source that establish their religion then they should not be included on any list, but the sourced entries should be kept. I don't see a POV issue because the list merely states
797:
as an unrelated intersection of facts, specifically the sort of thing discouraged by list guidelines. Besides, this is NOT the best way to handle this information. If we want to include information about the religion of Nobel laureates, why not simply add a field to the main lists themselves.
401:
And they have appeared again. Methinks there is no consensus, except temporary ones. But this is not a case of fringe theory or POV pushing. I see no need to delete what some people find useful, even if others think it's a waste of time. There are plenty of articles I would have no interest in
488:
There is plenty of interest in lists of this type. It would be POV to remove this one only (as bias against its specific topic), and POV to remove them all (as bias against such lists in general). Yet no list promotes a POV itself, nor do the lists jointly. That there is a continual campaign
820:
consider Hindu, Muslim, Christian and Jewish as cultures or civilizations. Serious scholars do argue that civilizational values correlate with or produce differential types of achievement. So I can see a potential use for this kind of list - Aside from the simple
Lutheran pride type thing.
625:
I see no objection to keep. This is an FYI page on wikipedia and people who study the intersection of science and religion may be interested in such info especially considering that some popular works seem to use Nobel demographics to comment on religion and science for good or
333:: I do not see any relation between the religious beliefs of one individual and his career or the fact he has won a Nobel prize. I fully agree with the arguments of the proponent and I have furthermore the feeling that this kind of list falls within the scope of
386:
209:
205:
169:
212:. All have closed as delete, all have been followed not long after by someone re-creating the list. The problem is the same every time: a trivial intersection of arbitrary categories with irresolvable problems of
201:
493:
things only, and don't seek to analyze or draw conclusions from the raw data they present. And now we get cries of WP:OR too, just because the list has documented sources. That is not what WP:OR means.
467:
What would be POV is deleting this and keeping the others. People are interested in such lists, as their history shows. Other people really don't like them. I don't actually see an inherent
163:
907:
518:
beliefs. It doesn't argue that
Christians are better at science or worse, and doesn't even compare laureates with the global population of the time. It might be a solution to merge to
122:
887:
779:
649:
Not only that some people becouse intersection of science and religion. It's also been several studies or infortmations about the religions of Nobel prize laureates as the book
95:
90:
99:
82:
416:
Not only that some people interested about these kind of list. It's also been several studies or infortmation about the religions of Nobel prize laureates as the book
578:. There is significant debate over whether religious belief is compatible with scientific work, therefore lists like this are useful. Compiling a list such as this,
129:
594:
is right that it would be best to have one list for all religions, and some of the text in the article needs to be fixed. But deleting the article isn't necessary.
838:
52:. We have a majority for keeping, but not quite consensus, considering the "merge" opinions. Perhaps there should be an RFC about this type of list in general
714:
Agree with user
Evensteven, the List of Christian Nobel laureates is already long beside the List of Jewish Nobel laureates is long too with 263 references.--
512:
1914, a fact that has significance in the history of science. The religious beliefs of scientists and the way these change over time are also significant.
184:
259:
And this list is not an original research since been several studies or infortmation about the religions of Nobel prize laureates as the book
86:
151:
17:
919:
899:
878:
851:
829:
811:
786:
770:
748:
723:
705:
682:
635:
605:
566:
550:
531:
503:
480:
449:
411:
396:
380:
354:
314:
292:
233:
78:
70:
64:
145:
402:
whatever, but why should that prevent or overturn their existence? Breadth is one of the benefits WP can offer. Let's use that.
587:
319:
Yes but not single word about these list. the list moslty sourced by the Nobel
Foundation. which is a reliable source, alot of
141:
618:
614:
583:
579:
546:
542:
368:
364:
247:
243:
554:
519:
191:
939:
798:
Simple elegant solution, and having only one article to find ask relevant information is better than having several. --
40:
389:, in which the lists of atheist, Christian, Hindu, Humanist, Jewish, and Muslim Nobel laureates were all deleted. --
622:
251:
766:
562:
393:
157:
320:
874:
935:
847:
825:
36:
762:
744:
701:
499:
407:
631:
591:
558:
390:
177:
337:. Beside all articles based on the pattern "list of Nobel laureates should be deleted as well. --
870:
804:
783:
601:
758:
915:
895:
658:
476:
425:
268:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
934:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
217:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
843:
821:
553:. But I don't see any reason for separate lists and Roches' suggestion above to merge into
527:
200:
There ahve been three separate deletion debates for articles on "list of Nobel laureates",
468:
298:
213:
740:
719:
697:
678:
495:
445:
403:
376:
350:
342:
288:
334:
736:
646:
627:
55:
387:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/List of atheist Nobel laureates (2nd nomination)
210:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/List of atheist Nobel laureates (3rd nomination)
206:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/List of atheist Nobel laureates (2nd nomination)
799:
597:
309:
303:
228:
222:
911:
891:
472:
116:
523:
715:
674:
522:, and this would facilitate discussing those that do not have a clear source.
441:
372:
346:
338:
284:
590:
is not original research; it's compiling existing research. I think
202:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/List of atheist Nobel laureates
928:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
671:
The Nobel Prize: A History of Genius, Controversy, and
Prestige
438:
The Nobel Prize: A History of Genius, Controversy, and
Prestige
385:
Actually, both of those articles have been deleted before. See
281:
The Nobel Prize: A History of Genius, Controversy, and
Prestige
665:
that done by the
University of Nebraska–Lincoln in 1998, and
432:
that done by the
University of Nebraska–Lincoln in 1998, and
275:
that done by the University of Nebraska–Lincoln in 1998, and
112:
108:
104:
297:
Thoise were also deleted and then re-created, and the
176:
655:
cientific Elite: Nobel Laureates in the United States
422:
cientific Elite: Nobel Laureates in the United States
265:
cientific Elite: Nobel Laureates in the United States
908:
list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions
190:
888:list of Christianity-related deletion discussions
780:list of Christianity-related deletion discussions
371:is still and no one ask for delet it. wonder why.
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
942:). No further edits should be made to this page.
663:Nobel prize winners in physics from 1901 to 1990
430:Nobel prize winners in physics from 1901 to 1990
273:Nobel prize winners in physics from 1901 to 1990
669:by William P. Lazarus and Mark Sullivan, and
436:by William P. Lazarus and Mark Sullivan, and
279:by William P. Lazarus and Mark Sullivan, and
8:
906:Note: This debate has been included in the
886:Note: This debate has been included in the
837:Note: This debate has been included in the
778:Note: This debate has been included in the
541:. I can't see any justification for having
301:means it's not "well-sourced and neutral".
905:
885:
839:list of Lists-related deletion discussions
836:
777:
254:. the list is well sourced and neutral.
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
555:List of Nobel laureates by religion
520:List of Nobel laureates by religion
345:) 14:21, 24 September 2015 (UTC)--
24:
551:List of Christian Nobel laureates
79:List of Christian Nobel laureates
71:List of Christian Nobel laureates
673:by Burton Feldman and others.--
667:Comparative Religion For Dummie
588:List of atheist Nobel laureates
440:by Burton Feldman and others.--
434:Comparative Religion For Dummie
283:by Burton Feldman and others.--
277:Comparative Religion For Dummie
879:16:05, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
855:05:00, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
852:14:39, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
830:14:36, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
812:12:41, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
787:08:05, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
771:23:28, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
749:22:24, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
724:21:14, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
706:21:09, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
683:11:09, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
636:19:32, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
619:List of Muslim Nobel laureates
615:List of Jewish Nobel laureates
606:18:54, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
584:List of Muslim Nobel laureates
580:List of Jewish Nobel laureates
567:16:49, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
547:List of Muslim Nobel laureates
543:List of Jewish Nobel laureates
532:16:28, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
504:15:45, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
481:14:47, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
450:11:09, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
412:04:21, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
397:03:49, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
381:14:24, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
369:List of Muslim Nobel laureates
365:List of Jewish Nobel laureates
355:14:21, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
315:14:17, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
293:13:56, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
248:List of Muslim Nobel laureates
244:List of Jewish Nobel laureates
234:13:50, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
1:
623:List of Hindu Nobel laureates
252:List of Hindu Nobel laureates
920:15:30, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
900:15:30, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
65:18:26, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
959:
869:possibly even economics.
653:by Baruch A. Shalev, and
420:by Baruch A. Shalev, and
263:by Baruch A. Shalev, and
242:: There also list's about
651:100 Years of Nobel Prizes
557:is entirely reasonable.
418:100 Years of Nobel Prizes
261:100 Years of Nobel Prizes
931:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
735:per sound arguments of
613:: since there are
323:is going latley.--
922:
902:
856:
789:
659:Harriet Zuckerman
426:Harriet Zuckerman
313:
269:Harriet Zuckerman
232:
63:
950:
933:
854:
802:
604:
307:
226:
195:
194:
180:
132:
120:
102:
62:
60:
53:
34:
958:
957:
953:
952:
951:
949:
948:
947:
946:
940:deletion review
929:
842:
800:
595:
549:without having
137:
128:
93:
77:
74:
56:
54:
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
956:
954:
945:
944:
924:
923:
903:
882:
881:
858:
857:
833:
832:
814:
791:
790:
774:
773:
757:Seems to pass
752:
729:
728:
727:
726:
709:
708:
690:
689:
688:
687:
686:
685:
639:
638:
608:
592:Gnome de plume
569:
559:Gnome de plume
535:
534:
514:
513:
506:
483:
461:
460:
459:
458:
457:
456:
455:
454:
453:
452:
391:Metropolitan90
358:
357:
327:
326:
325:
324:
321:WP:IDONTLIKEIT
317:
256:
255:
198:
197:
134:
73:
68:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
955:
943:
941:
937:
932:
926:
925:
921:
917:
913:
909:
904:
901:
897:
893:
889:
884:
883:
880:
876:
872:
871:Peterkingiron
867:
863:
860:
859:
853:
849:
845:
840:
835:
834:
831:
827:
823:
818:
815:
813:
810:
809:
808:
803:
796:
793:
792:
788:
785:
781:
776:
775:
772:
768:
764:
760:
756:
753:
750:
746:
742:
738:
734:
731:
730:
725:
721:
717:
713:
712:
711:
710:
707:
703:
699:
695:
692:
691:
684:
680:
676:
672:
668:
664:
660:
656:
652:
648:
645:
644:
643:
642:
641:
640:
637:
633:
629:
624:
620:
616:
612:
609:
607:
603:
600:
599:
593:
589:
585:
581:
577:
573:
570:
568:
564:
560:
556:
552:
548:
544:
540:
537:
536:
533:
529:
525:
521:
516:
515:
510:
507:
505:
501:
497:
492:
487:
484:
482:
478:
474:
470:
466:
463:
462:
451:
447:
443:
439:
435:
431:
427:
423:
419:
415:
414:
413:
409:
405:
400:
399:
398:
395:
392:
388:
384:
383:
382:
378:
374:
370:
366:
362:
361:
360:
359:
356:
352:
348:
344:
340:
336:
332:
331:Strong delete
329:
328:
322:
318:
316:
311:
306:
305:
300:
296:
295:
294:
290:
286:
282:
278:
274:
270:
266:
262:
258:
257:
253:
249:
245:
241:
238:
237:
236:
235:
230:
225:
224:
219:
215:
211:
207:
203:
193:
189:
186:
183:
179:
175:
171:
168:
165:
162:
159:
156:
153:
150:
147:
143:
140:
139:Find sources:
135:
131:
127:
124:
118:
114:
110:
106:
101:
97:
92:
88:
84:
80:
76:
75:
72:
69:
67:
66:
61:
59:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
930:
927:
865:
861:
816:
806:
805:
794:
754:
732:
693:
670:
666:
662:
654:
650:
610:
596:
575:
571:
538:
508:
490:
485:
464:
437:
433:
429:
421:
417:
330:
302:
280:
276:
272:
264:
260:
239:
221:
199:
187:
181:
173:
166:
160:
154:
148:
138:
125:
57:
50:no consensus
49:
47:
31:
28:
844:E.M.Gregory
822:E.M.Gregory
486:Strong Keep
363:Both list
164:free images
741:Xxanthippe
698:Evensteven
496:Evensteven
404:Evensteven
58:Sandstein
936:talk page
912:• Gene93k
892:• Gene93k
866:reinstate
763:Andrew D.
737:Mayan1990
647:Mayan1990
628:Mayan1990
37:talk page
938:or in a
759:WP:LISTN
598:Argyriou
123:View log
39:or in a
694:Comment
473:Johnbod
471:issue.
218:WP:NPOV
170:WPÂ refs
158:scholar
96:protect
91:history
801:Jayron
795:Delete
784:samtar
661:, and
602:(talk)
524:Roches
469:WP:SYN
428:, and
394:(talk)
299:WP:SYN
271:, and
214:WP:SYN
142:Google
100:delete
716:Jobas
675:Jobas
572:Merge
539:Merge
509:Keep.
442:Jobas
373:Jobas
347:Lebob
339:Lebob
335:WP:OR
310:Help!
285:Jobas
229:Help!
185:JSTOR
146:books
130:Stats
117:views
109:watch
105:links
16:<
916:talk
896:talk
875:talk
864:and
862:Keep
848:talk
826:talk
817:Keep
767:talk
755:Keep
745:talk
733:Keep
720:talk
702:talk
679:talk
632:talk
626:bad.
621:and
617:and
611:Keep
586:and
576:Keep
563:talk
545:and
528:talk
500:talk
491:list
477:talk
465:Keep
446:talk
408:talk
377:talk
367:and
351:talk
343:talk
289:talk
250:and
246:and
240:Keep
216:and
178:FENS
152:news
113:logs
87:talk
83:edit
657:by
574:or
424:by
304:Guy
267:by
223:Guy
192:TWL
121:– (
918:)
910:.
898:)
890:.
877:)
850:)
841:.
828:)
807:32
782:.
769:)
761:.
747:)
739:.
722:)
704:)
681:)
634:)
582:,
565:)
530:)
502:)
479:)
448:)
410:)
379:)
353:)
291:)
220:.
208:,
204:,
172:)
115:|
111:|
107:|
103:|
98:|
94:|
89:|
85:|
914:(
894:(
873:(
846:(
824:(
765:(
751:.
743:(
718:(
700:(
677:(
630:(
561:(
526:(
498:(
475:(
444:(
406:(
375:(
349:(
341:(
312:)
308:(
287:(
231:)
227:(
196:)
188:·
182:·
174:·
167:·
161:·
155:·
149:·
144:(
136:(
133:)
126:·
119:)
81:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.