:::You're completely missing the point. Again, I do not care if his religion is mentioned in the article and notability does not apply to this content. It's about whether it's encylopedic. And religion is most certainly typical content when adding biographical content. And for the record, I was among the editor's to say that I've seen no reliable sourcing of his religion anyway, which is why I said it's a moot point at this time. The other issue is consistency. Editors are saying his religion is not relevant, yet cannot explain why other similarly irrelevant content remains in the article. Understand that a thread that's been open for a few hours is like a newborn baby. Involved editors trying to hide it or close it is very bad form and totally inappropriate. What's the problem with allowing other editors some time to weigh in on the discussion? But the bottom line is that if it's going to be closed it must be by someone who has not commented in the thread.