Death to Haifan Bahaism
2008-11-14 06:18:58 UTC
Keep — I note the persistent attacks on this article either by IP's or
by new editors. The attacks imho are religion-based as this person is
a vocal critic of certain Baha'i institutions. There is no evidence
that his works are vanity-press publications. The article is fairly
new and deserves new eyes to expand it, instead of this pressure by a
vested group or a few individuals to suppress it. Wjhonson (talk)
17:13, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
Comment- Please feel free to cross-reference the above editors with
Baha'i articles to prove for yourself that this is an attack based on
religious issues, and has almost nothing to do with notability. As has
been pointed out. Wjhonson (talk) 04:57, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
Comment - Cunado I am not a critic of the Baha'i faith. I am a critic
of Bahai revisionists who refuse to even read their own history and
fight tooth-and-nail over any minutiae they perceive to come from an
opposition camp. Secondly, this deletion was entered by a Single-
Purpose-Account. Look at the contributions of this SPA. Their only
purpose is to attack Glaysher. This del entry should be voided on that
basis solely. We do not cow-tow to SPA's. Wjhonson (talk) 23:51, 12
April 2008 (UTC)
by new editors. The attacks imho are religion-based as this person is
a vocal critic of certain Baha'i institutions. There is no evidence
that his works are vanity-press publications. The article is fairly
new and deserves new eyes to expand it, instead of this pressure by a
vested group or a few individuals to suppress it. Wjhonson (talk)
17:13, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
Comment- Please feel free to cross-reference the above editors with
Baha'i articles to prove for yourself that this is an attack based on
religious issues, and has almost nothing to do with notability. As has
been pointed out. Wjhonson (talk) 04:57, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
Comment - Cunado I am not a critic of the Baha'i faith. I am a critic
of Bahai revisionists who refuse to even read their own history and
fight tooth-and-nail over any minutiae they perceive to come from an
opposition camp. Secondly, this deletion was entered by a Single-
Purpose-Account. Look at the contributions of this SPA. Their only
purpose is to attack Glaysher. This del entry should be voided on that
basis solely. We do not cow-tow to SPA's. Wjhonson (talk) 23:51, 12
April 2008 (UTC)