Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bucailleism
BoogaLouie, it'd be best if you put newer comments at the bottom. I think the "(i.e. Bucaillism)" is the give-away. Many sources discuss the issue of scientific facts or otherwise in the Qur'an. Very few of which use this neologism. We can quite easily say in another established article dedicated to this topic (The relation between Islam and science, Maurice Bucaille, Qur'an and miracles, etc.) that some people call aspects of it Bucailleism, but to generalise the issue in a way that you and the article attempts to do poisons the well and does not responsibly reflect the nature of the topic. In fact, the article is partly original syntesis consisting of your own analysis, the rest of it is a |coatrack of negative views and sceptical narrative
— User:Itaqallah, 21:44, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:COATRACK (Wikipedia:Coatrack articles)