Deletion of Religious terrorism

Comment: per , . Islamic terrorism is obviously a form of religious terrorism. Deleting this article would probably result in it being redirected elsewhere, with "Islamic terrorism" being a potential target. We should be countering |systemic bias by ensuring we consider topics from a WP:neutral point of view|neutral point of view, which we are in danger of not doing by wanting to delete this article
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:DUE||WP:systemic bias)

Comment: The question, I think, is whether it's possible to treat religious terrorism as a diachronic phenomenon without extended acts of synthesis. Are there, in other words, enough scholarly treatments of religious terrorism in itself, rather than the religious terrorism of this or that country or people, to merit and substantiate a separate article? If there aren't, the article will almost inevitably deteriorate into either a random list of various species and instances of religious terrorism, or into |original research. The article as it stands is fairly synthetic, and needs radical surgery
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR)

Comment: per .  While the article in its present state may not evidence notability, ''notability is a property of a topic, not an article draft,'' and the subject of religous terrorism is one which receives specific coverage in reliable sources.  http://books.google.com/books?id=swJkERVd80cC&pg=PA68&dq=which+religions+incite+terrorism&hl=en&sa=X&ei=EXD1UK3fJIP42QWepYCYAg&ved=0CEIQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=which%20religions%20incite%20terrorism&f=false, http://books.google.com/books?id=0fooSsaO6rMC&dq=which+religions+incite+terrorism&source=gbs_navlinks_s, http://books.google.com/books?id=V1xukwRq2cUC&dq=which+religions+terrorism&source=gbs_navlinks_s, http://books.google.com/books?id=1NgQAQAAIAAJ, http://books.google.com/books?id=WZdDbmxe_a4C&pg=PR12&dq=which+religions+terrorism&hl=en&sa=X&ei=4HD1UOK1HIbF2QXB4IDoBw&ved=0CFkQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=which%20religions%20terrorism&f=false, http://books.google.com/books?id=0RYbdOui4gkC&dq=which+religions+terrorism&source=gbs_navlinks_s, ....  The nominator's claim that sources (by which he or she should mean "available" sources, not sources listed at the article) on the topic are unavailable is quickly belied by a simple Gbooks search
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: this article could cover everything from modern-day Islamic terrorism, to attacks on black churches during the civil rights movements, to abortion clinic bombings/killings by religiously-motivated attackers, to the persecution of Jews throughout history. There would be more than sufficient sources to sustain the article. If it's in a poor current state, |go fix that
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Be bold (WP:SOFIXIT)