Deletion of List of Christian Nobel laureates (4th nomination)

Comment: The intersection of religion and specifically getting a Nobel prize doens't appear to be something treated by sources as something meeting  (or specifically ) beyond basic demographics. The keep votes so far have been fairly superficial and not grounded in policy by typically waxing about the importance of religion influencing science. That's tangential to this AfD and more appropriate for broader science and religion article treatments.  This is a fairly weak X of Y classification in violation of  policy. Grounding in policy is ultimately what decides if this stays or goes (not ), and I haven't seen anything that really supports keeping it yet
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:LISTN||WP:NOTDIR||WP:OTHERSTUFF)

Comment: If I understand the nomination correctly – it does not point to any P&Gs to support deletion rationales – the primary argument for deletion is that List of Christian Nobel laureates {{tq|"is a very long list with 427 people"}}. But that is a matter that can be solved by following , it is not a reason for deletion. Is {{tq|"75% of all winners are christians. So, there's nothing special if a Nobel laureate happens to be christian"}} a secondary deletion argument? If yes, I don't buy it; sources show that this list is a valid, encyclopedic cross-categorization
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Article size (WP:SPLITLIST)

Comment: This article is very well sourced and definitely meets . It has also survived three previous attempts to delete it, so there appears to be a consensus in favor of keeping it. There is nothing unusual about such an article, as we also have the articles List of Muslim Nobel laureates, List of Jewish Nobel laureates, and List of nonreligious Nobel laureates. If the Hindu article (or a proposed version) is shown to be well-sourced and can meet GNG, than it should also have an article, though that is a separate discussion
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: I look at this article and see a vast field of names of people with unsourced claims of their religious affiliation, let alone no sourcing for that affiliation being of any importance to their lives or accomplishments. Some of them are living people and this is completely unacceptable for a  but it should also not be acceptable even for the no-longer-living ones. This sort of "my religion is better because it has winners of (unrelated event)" jingoism has to go
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP)

Comment: In agreement with the other comments here about faith historically encouraging scientific endeavor (e.g. Isaac Newton's Christian faith compelling him to study physics http://www.christianitytoday.com/history/issues/issue-30/faith-behind-famous-isaac-newton.html), this topic passes , with reliable sources discussing it, such as the scholarly text ''100 Years of Nobel Prizes''. It seems that despite two well-done closes on this 4th Nomination AfD alone, a minority of users here have fought to reverse the close (twice) in order to reach a different outcome (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ADGG&type=revision&diff=827307457&oldid=827217136 & https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ARoySmith&type=revision&diff=825743350&oldid=824842611). The first close (and second) should be respected and the sysop closing this should take into account the wider consensus to keep this article established in the AfDs before this. I also find it amusing that despite the existence of List of Muslim Nobel laureates, List of Jewish Nobel laureates, and List of nonreligious Nobel laureates, people only seem to be triggered by the article about Christian Nobel laureates
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: Many scientists were and are influenced by their faith in order to pursue the study of science. University of Oxford Professor John Lennox clearly details this, https://web.archive.org/web/20160314113608/http://www.rzim.eu/john-lennoxs-lent-talk-for-radio-4 here. Indeed, Alfred North Whitehead summarized this in the following quote: "Men became scientific because they expected law in nature, and they expected law in nature because they believed in a lawgiver". In the Medieval Era and beyond, to learn about God, people studied two books, the ''Book of Scripture'' and the ''Book of Nature''--the Christian faith of individuals influenced people to pursue scientific endeavor so they could learn more about God. Individuals commenting here like User:Agricolae and User:Rhododendrites are being disingenuous in their comments by setting up strawman arguments with "List of blonde Nobel laureates" and "List of Scorpio Nobel laureates" and I think they know that. While faith has influenced individuals to pursue science, their hair color or astrological sign does not. Besides that,  does not exist. In fact, the whole academic field of science and religion is dedicated to studying this relationship, while obviously no such field exists for the strawman fields listed by these two users. The article should definitely be kept without a doubt. --{{nowrap
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:OTHERSTUFF)