Talk:List of former Muslims

This article was nominated for deletion on 5 Nov 2006. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

This article was nominated for deletion on 14 December 2006. The result of the discussion was keep.

For anyone who thinks this page should be Deleted, read this

Undoubtedly, there will be many "people" or a group of people who will panic and want this page deleted as soon as possible. Now, List of converts to Islam already exists and so this is a list created just like that list, of Notable people who have left Islam. Now relax, spare yourself the trouble and dont nominate it for deletion because it wont be deleted. Thank you. --Matt57 06:44, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

As noted on Category_talk:Former_Muslims: ... one possible reason for concern might be that renouncing Islam is a death-penalty offense under Islamic law, and that people have had fatwa death penalties declared against them, or have actually been killed, for statements or actions deemed "disrespectful" to Islam. Under these circumstances, putting this category on such a prominent website might well be seen as increasing the risk of death for those listed on it. The same is not true for a category of converts to Islam. I make this comment not in advocacy but as a possible answer to your question. -- SAJordan 07:58, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

I knew people would somehow try to get this page deleted. Now, people only from your group will want this page deleted. The fact is, these people who have left Islam are already out there. People already know about their apostacy. Someone tried to get the Category deleted and it wasnt deleted. See you there on the CFD page.--Matt57 14:42, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

What "your group" do you attribute to me? And why do you allege that I "will want this page deleted"? You asked why people were concerned about this topic, and I undertook to answer your question — not in advocacy, as I said above. -- SAJordan 19:47, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Followup: after posting the above, I went to the deletion vote page where you eloquently and persuasively argued that other lists should also be deleted. You've convinced me. So I've just joined "your group" favoring deletion. Congratulations! -- SAJordan 20:11, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

So let me ask you: Whats wrong with List of converts to Islam? Why do you think it should be deleted? lol. I only said that IF this page is deleted, THEN so should be the others. I'm not saying that these pages should be deleted, period. I'm only arguing for a fair treatment. Now, I think these pages should exist by all means - just like the public thinks on that Voting page. --Matt57 14:31, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

It was the point at which you said — ... I will request the deletion of other lists as well such as List of Muslims, and its many Sub Lists which are linked on that page. If somehow List of Muslims page is also not deleted, I'll take this matter up to Arb Com. — that convinced me. "Fair treatment", after all. -- SAJordan 15:27, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Fair treatment aside, you're not telling me why you think its OK to delete List of Muslims or List of converts to Islam.--Matt57 15:53, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Suggestions for improvement

If possible, can you give a short 1-2 sentence explaination on why or when these people converted, or who they are.--Sefringle 22:24, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. It also must be sourced to assure we're not "outing" people.--T. Anthony 12:09, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, we need to improve this article and display information in a better way. First by profession, then an alphabetical list and then more if possible. Tabulating and pictures would be nice if possible. Infact, right now I can think of a picture of Nonie Darwish, she has one on her page. Pictures will make this page look nice. We have to improve this page fast because the "others" (you know who) will want to get it deleted. The "Former Muslims" category was a target of Deletion as well. --Matt57 14:38, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I got Nonie's picture in. You guys, bring in more pictures too. There's a great Shoebat picture on the internet for which I've asked permission. See how nice the page looks with pictures? And this is very important for this page considering how dangerous it is to convert out of Islam. I think it would be pertinent to note at the top of the page that converting from Islam is a death penalty by Sharia law (or hadith etc). I'll see what I can do sometime. Meanwhile, please make some more improvements. --Matt57 14:42, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

List orders

Since this is a list, it should be a list by:

• Alphaphabetical order
• Profession
• Country of Origin

It would be nice if we can have a table which can sort on a click. I wonder if thats possible here. --Matt57 16:03, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

I added some annotation in a few places, this is acceptable or even desirable, and also more sections. I'll try to alphabetize the sections a bit better here soon. A table is neat, but also a lot of work. Sorry to tell you I'm not committed/interest enough in this article to do that, but good luck.--T. Anthony 16:18, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for the sections. I hope others join in as well. I can handle making the table if you tell me what we should put there.--Matt57 04:54, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

It depends on what you want to do with a table. In a list like this I think a section on their current religious status is a natural. For example what they converted to or if they're now secular-humanists or atheists. In cases where it's not clear, including those where they're uncertain for themselves, you can put "uncertain" or "undefined." A section for sources is also a good idea as it reduces the chances of listing people who don't want to be listed. Other stuff, like a section for pictures and such, depends on how much you want to do. Most of the lists at Wikipedia:Featured lists#Religion and beliefs are tabled and can give you a sense of how to do it.--T. Anthony 05:43, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

relevance?

what is the reason for having a "list of people who left Islam"? did they leave Islam because of Islam? or did they convert to X because of X? where is the precedence for having "list of people who left X"? simply, if an ex-Christian converts to Islam, he is placed in the "List of converts to Islam" and not duplicated in the "list of people who left Christianity", and neither is any other convert duplicated in "list of people who left Hinduism", "list of people who left Athiesm". who says they converted to another thought through negating their own? ITAQALLAH 04:15, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Your query has been answered now on the AFD. The list is here to stay. It will be back on the project's page as well. I hope that makes you happy. --Matt57 06:22, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Ali Sina is notable with respect to Islam articles (but not Pokemon articles).

The following text is suggested and is being removed usually by saying he is non-notable and non-existant.

• Ali Sina (Pseudonym), well-known for being an online critic of Islam who has contributed to a book by Ibn Warraq called Leaving Islam: Apostates Speak Out

This is wrong as with respect to apostacy and Islam he is very relevant. Pseudonymity is no grounds for rejection as there is precedent that Apostacy in Islam can have inhumane consequences. Obviously what Ali Sina thinks of Pokemon is not notable as he hasn't commented on it before. I suggest we reword to,

• Ali Sina (Pseudonym), well-known for being an online critic of Islam on the Faith Freedom International web site who has contributed to a book by Ibn Warraq called Leaving Islam: Apostates Speak Out.

as that removes the wikilink around his name. Ttiotsw 04:35, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

my main concern was that "Ali Sina (Pseudonym)" by itself probably wasn't worthy of mention: the list is for those who reach the level of notability required for biographical articles. mentioning FFI along with it, which is notable, complicates matters slightly. regardless, Ibn Warraq's book on its own is not an establishment of notability at all. despite the fact that the pubication is not something i would call "independant", there are dozens of other personalities who give their "testimonies" in that book who are dreadfully non-notable, such as "Kamran Mirza" (not the other Kamran Mirza), "Azam Kamguian", "Faizal Muhammad", some people only known by their first names such as "Nadia", "Faiza", and another simply referred to as "A Malaysian ex-Muslim". therefore, it cannot be argued that mention in this book alone grants a non-notable figure the right to be mentioned in a list about notable ex-Muslims. ITAQALLAH 15:53, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

A Pseudonym can not a be an entry if i create a book that becomes notable were i say i was a ex-Jew, do i get there? A anonymous person saying he is ex-something can not be takes as a RS. Were is his proof? Its a good gimic to claim being a ex-Muslim, it will sell you more books, but i see no evidence. --Striver - talk 15:57, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Given that this is a pseudonym, is there verfiable sources to show that the person in question was once a Muslim? --BostonMA ^talk 16:26, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

The notability of Sina and his Faith Freedom International organization was recently established during an AfD debate. If we require that the person should provide us with his or her picture, home address and what not, then Sina is not the only apostate that should be removed from the list. Fact, however, is that we got no reason to doubt his claim that he an Iranian and a former Muslim, and as long as that is the case he's an ex-Muslim because he says he is an ex-Muslim. -- Karl Meier 16:59, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

the notability of FFI was established (apparently) in the previous AfD(s). not so for Sina, however. ITAQALLAH 17:11, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

His claim to be a former Muslim may or may not be true. Whether we choose to doubt him is beside the point. Assertions in Wikipedia require reliable sources. In this case, our source is anonymous. The notability of Sina and Faith Freedom Internation does not imply that Sina is a reliable source. --BostonMA ^talk 17:11, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Whether or not Ali Sina is a reliable source doesn't matter when we are going to determine if he is notable enough to be mentioned on this list. That is an entirely different question. However, what does indeed matter is the fact that the organization that he founded and is still the most important person behind has been determined to be notable in a recent AfD debate. Another thing that matters that he has personally attracted a fair amount of media attention, and has been mentioned in several articles outside FFI. You can find the links to these articles in the external links section in the Faith Freedom International article. -- Karl Meier 22:46, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

"Ali Sina" should be kept. Arrow740 00:39, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

The purpose of Wikipedia is to not support a particular view but to be an encyclopedia and present a consensus view on a particular subject. The reasons for excluding someone from one from this list if they are living is through the guidelines of WP:LIVING as it is describing someone (and with Muslims in some countries this can be a very grave and dangerous situation). The basis of notability on this page need not make them notable for their own article but inclusion here is on two grounds,

• if they are notable enough for their own page on Wikipedia or,
• if they are notable with respect to the subject on hand, namely apostacy or leaving Islam.

Notability guidelines in Wikipedia is quite clear on this. That Ali Sina (as a nome de plume) has contributed to a book from a notable source, namely Leaving Islam: Apostates Speak Out and it would seem clear that the word "leaving" and "Islam" to the man in the street means that the author supports or is happy to be associated with the concept of being in the catagory of being a "former Muslim" mean it does not fail WP:LIVING. It passes reliable sources (namely the scope of the book), and the notability in this subject area. We do not need to know the persons name. All we are adding is the name "Ali Sina" i.e. we need not verify his birth certificate but use the authorship of contributions under that name as a reliable source. The catagory does not state that notability must be outside of the field of apostacy only thus someone notable because they are the subject of this catagory itself i.e. it is self-referential to the catagory is still grounds for inclusion. For an alternative view a person who was a self-described atheist if they then contributed to a book on say Christianity and that was their main contribution they would be included in the list of former atheists and I would be quite happy to include them on that ground. Until the catagory description specifically excludes on the grounds on notability solely on this subject of apostacy it is not clear that Ali Sina can be excluded.

My reason for including such a long entry was because so many people have tried to remove the entry without adding comments. I'me happy to cull the text down to say,

Ali Sina (Pseudonym), well-known for being an online critic of Islam who has contributed to a book by Ibn Warraq called Leaving Islam: Apostates Speak Out.

As that removes the Faith Freedom International reference as that is ancillary to the person (the article is not a list of former Muslim web sites). Ttiotsw 05:41, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

This article should be renamed to List of ex-Muslims

Because we have other lists like:

• List of ex-atheists - Since renamed List of former proponents of atheism
• List of ex-Protestants - Since renamed List of former Protestants
• List of ex-Roman Catholics

So for consistency, we should have this renamed to: List of ex-Muslims. --Matt57 20:11, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes I agree it would be a better name. Ttiotsw 05:49, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

I decided to be bold and moved the page to List of former Muslims. My reason for choosing former over ex was to maintain consistency with Category:Former Muslims. GabrielF 06:54, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Weak Support I don't have much opinion on the issue, but it is more consistent to do it that way. Though if you want to move it, it might be a good idea to nominate it at Wikipedia:Requested moves.--Sefringle 03:20, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

In some respects I think "former" sounds better and would almost favor switching the others to "former." Either way having this as "former" rather than "ex" seems to be only a slight difference, not worth troubling about.--T. Anthony 08:47, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

I'll take back my previous suggestion and agree, lets keep it as it is since the other lists also follow the "Former ___" format. Actually that was a suggestion at a time the list had the name "List of people who left Islam". --Matt57 14:40, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Statistics

For consistency with the List of converts to Islam article, we should include some statistics on the number of former muslims.--Sefringle 07:33, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for the late reply. You mean a number of apostates in the list? Not getting it, or perhaps your question is not valid anymore, the article may have changed. --Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 14:13, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah your right, I'll remove it (unless it is restored on the other article)--Sefringle 23:17, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

I'll store it below for now --Sefringle 23:19, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Statistics blcokquote

It is estimated that there are as many as 200,000 former Muslims live in the United Kingdom. Additionally, Ahmad Al-Katani suggests in an interview on Aljazeera that in Africa, 6 million Muslims convert to Christianity every year. Furthermore, although there are former Muslims in the Middle East, there are currently no definitive figures available as former Muslims are usually persecuted in this region (and may keep their conversion hidden from society), and therefore can not be reliably numbered.

--Sefringle 23:19, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

New entry

Please include the gentleman Daveed Gartenstein-Ross into the list of former Muslims. His website and book especially bare testimony to his apostasy. He has articles published as well. I simply am too busy for wikipedia, at the present moment. Thank-you, ladies. :0) Usedbook 05:35, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

The problem is notability. We can't include him if he is not notable, and the way we were figuring out who is notable is who has an article about them on wikipedia. If he is notable, please find some secondary sources that mention him, and create an article about him, but if not, we cannot include him in this list.--Sefringle 08:15, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

It seems he is notable. I'll see about creating an article about him.--Sefringle 08:52, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Akbar

Akbar was always a Muslim. Can someone provide the exact quote from the source cited that suggests that he renounced Islam? I haven't removed the source, just asking for a clarification.Bless sins 17:42, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm guessing you mean the Akbar who founded Din-i-Ilahi. He did create this religion and there's reason to believe he was, possibly, one of the only adherents of it. Still I have heard people claim that he saw "Din-i-ilahi" as complementary/containing Islam and if so that might complicate things. By adding some additional syncretic belief system to a position as a Muslim ruler did he become non-Muslim or not? I don't have an answer.--T. Anthony 05:12, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Bless Sins recent edits

Why did you remove Carlos Menem? The source[1] clearly says he converted to catholism from Islam. --Sefringle 19:35, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Can you specify the exact quote that says so? Thanks.Bless sins 22:19, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

read the first paragraph of the article:

Dr. Carlos Saul Menem was born to Mohibe Akil and Saul Menem, two immigrants who settled in the province of La Rioja, Republica Argentina, in Anillaco on July 2, 1930. He was born to a Muslim family who allowed him to follow the catholic faith

--Sefringle 03:47, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Exactly, his parents were Muslim, but they allowed him to practic Catholocism. Presumably, he was never a Muslim.Bless sins 17:38, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Also, do you have a reliable source that Ali Sina has converted from Islam?Bless sins 22:19, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

"Apostate", meaning One who has abandoned one's religious faith, a political party, one's principles, or a cause, a person who renounces a religious or political belief or principle. Ali Sina is a contributor to a book called "Leaving Islam: Apostates Speak Out" which is published by a notable publisher ( Prometheus Books ) and a notable author Ibn Warraq. On balance the source is thus reliable. Ttiotsw 23:24, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

BlessSins - why did you remove Anwar Sheikh? How is Ibn Warraq not a RS? If you want, I can bring multiple sources for his apostasy. In fact he was a famous apostate and his material should be mentioned in Wikipedia. He got the death sentence from 14 Islamic clerics in Pakistan. --Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 13:58, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

The question is how is Ibn Warraq a reliable source? Pleaase bring your "multiple (hopefully reliable) sources", I'd like to see them.Bless sins 17:38, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Ibn Warraq is not a RS? Come on now. Reliable sources are credible published materials with a reliable publication process; their authors are generally regarded as trustworthy, or are authoritative in relation to the subject at hand. WP:RS. Why do you think he's not reliable? And you know there are more than multiple sources confirming the apostasy of Anwar Shaikh. We can put those in too.--Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 19:35, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Here's the ref information for Anwar Shaikh. I have the book with me: Page 285-292. Accoring to the last page, he calls himself a "liberal humanist" though, not a hindu. We can also create a new section on his own page "Views on Islam" from his testimony on this book. --Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 01:11, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

And here's the ref for Ali Sina's testimony: Page. 137-157, same book. --Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 01:18, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

"their authors are generally regarded as trustworthy". What makes you say that Warraq is trustworthy?Bless sins 18:32, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Are you serious about questioning Ibn Warraq's status of RS? Ok, for one, he's listed in List of Islamic studies scholars. I now feel like expanding that Anwar Sheikh article. Could you also provide a defense of your removal of the 2 Indian converts to hinduism? What makes you think he's not trustworthy? You know the law in the US - "innocent until proven guilty". Prove then that Warraq is not trustworthy. Unless and until you do so, he's an RS. By the way here's another source for Anwar's apostasy of Islam, mentioned on his article right now [2] --Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 20:10, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Puh-lease. I already had a debate with you over whether Ali Sina is a RS. (A debate in which you said that Ali Sina's comments, that Muslims are bullies and have no dignity and honour, are true). It is up to you to show how Warraq is a RS.Bless sins 00:23, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

If thats the way you want to go then, fine. I added multiple refs now for Ali Sina and Anwar Sheikh. See, all this only resulted in the article being improved. And what makes you think Ibn Warraq is not trustworthy? RS says: "their authors are generally regarded as trustworthy". And Ali Sina being a RS is not an issue right now, and its irrelevant to mention this. --Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 13:23, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Ali Sina is notable

Sorry, I confirmed the edit before giving a summary. Here's the thing: Ali is notable. He has his own redirect here. Any questions? --Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 01:05, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Tell me then where is his own article? If he was notable, then there would be one. --MomoShomo 01:07, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Here it is: Ali Sina. If he wasnt notable, he would have his own redirect. Plus, have you read the talk page of Ali Sina? Ali has been covered by multiple sources included Asia Times. That makes him notable. --Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 01:08, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Minor amounts of coverage in obscure online-only news sources does not make one notable. The only exception to this is the Worldnetdaily article. If he was notable, he would have his own article, not just a redirect. That is quite simple really.--MomoShomo 01:16, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

His notability is proved on the link I gave you. --Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 01:25, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Not at all. MomoShomo 01:30, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

I told you to continue the debate on the link I gave. --Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 02:22, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Qualifications for inclusion on lists such as this

I have recently started a thread at Talk:List of notable converts to Christianity#Qualifications for inclusion of "List of former (x)s" in which I am hoping we can standardize the qualifications for inclusion in such lists. Any constructive comments would be more than welcome. John Carter 14:52, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Nazarbayev

Why Nazarbayev is former Muslim, if page quoted as source clearly states: ”the president moved from being a professed atheist to proudly proclaiming his Muslim heritage”?

Problems with User:Number1KufiSlapper's edits

• Abo of Tiflis - the only page where this person is cited in this book is page 50, which says nothing of any conversion.
• Taslima Nasrin - the cited page says nothing of a conversion.
• Kuldeep Manak - the cited page says nothing of a conversion.
• Nafisa Ali - the cited page says nothing of a conversion and never states that she was Muslim.
• Aashish Khan - the cited source is a Netscape user-submitted page, and it leads to a blog.
• Nursultan Nazarbayev - the cited source states that this person converted from Atheism to Islam, not the other way around.
• Akbar Gbaja-Biamila - the cited source doesn't even mention the person.
• Alexander Bekovich-Cherkassky - this page is written in Russian and I don't see anything that indicates a conversion by this person.
• Emily Ruete - the sources seemed to have been copied straight from the Wikipedia article page without any verification.
• Ali Sina - this reinsertion does not address my reason for removal.
• Humayun Azad - the source cited, a letter, does not mention any conversion.
• As'ad Abu Khalil - I originally removed this entry for the reason in my edit summary. The reinsertion did not address that concern.

It becomes difficult to continue assuming good faith with these gross misrepresentations and carelessly inserted sources. Ibn Shah 04:38, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Good faith? come on now Ibn Shah! You have a clear and detailed history of being AGAINST anything that be could be used to put Islam in a bad light Ibn Shah. DONT LIE NOW! YOUR KUFI HAS BEEN SMACKED OFF YOU HAVE BEEN EXPOSED FOR POV PUSHING!

Abo_of_Tiflis READ THE ARTICLE HOMEBOY! he was muslim but converted to christianity! Taslima Nasrin check her official homepage! Akbar Gbaja-Biamila http://blog.chargers.com/2006/07/akbar_gbajabiamila_keeps_the_f.html Nafisa Ali you didnt even read the cited page YOU LYING SACK OF @#%&! It clearly states she was born Muslim and conveted to Vedanta, a school of Hinduism later in life. Kuldeep Manak the man is a Sikh

I'm not even bother going on with this @#*, yo Ibn Shah grow up and quit deleting whatever you feel like it. Rest of the editors on this page, pay close attention to this guy! If he has it his way this whole page would be gone! EuroBrydGang

"Abo_of_Tiflis READ THE ARTICLE HOMEBOY! he was muslim but converted to christianity!"

You cannot rely on Wikipedia articles as sources for other articles. Please read the policy on reliable sources.

"Taslima Nasrin check her official homepage!"

The page you inserted does not state anything about her being a Muslim or a conversion. You can't expect the reader to do the work for you and delve into the website trying to find a citation.

"Akbar Gbaja-Biamila http://blog.chargers.com/2006/07/akbar_gbajabiamila_keeps_the_f.html"

That's not the sourced you used in your edit. This source is a blog but it's a subdomain of the official website, so I assume it might be okay.

"Nafisa Ali you didnt even read the cited page YOU LYING SACK OF @#%&! It clearly states she was born Muslim and conveted to Vedanta, a school of Hinduism later in life."

You're mistaken and clearly misrepresenting the source, as I did read it carefully. It states that her father is a Muslim, her mother is Catholic, and she is a follower of Vedanta. It does not say that she was ever a Muslim nor does it mention a conversion.

"Kuldeep Manak the man is a Sikh"

That's great, but it doesn't provide anything to prove that he was a Muslim before, nor did the page that you inserted say that.

I also don't understand why you need two accounts to edit one page. You may want to note that this policy and that I don't wear a kufi. Ibn Shah 05:27, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

sockpuppetry in this manner is unacceptable, as is the incivility. ITAQALLAH 05:31, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

It seems that his original account was blocked for a username violation so he made a new one. Ibn Shah 05:47, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

ah.. i wasn't aware of that. ITAQALLAH 05:51, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Just so it's known, I've found two sources for Abo of Tiflis' conversion: an easy to read hagiography site and a published source on textual criticism which mentions his conversion. Therefore, I'm adding him back in. Just a heads up.--C.Logan 09:04, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Ali Sina Disputed

Why is Ali Sina have a "disputed" tag after his name? It is pretty obvious that he is a former muslim.--Sefringle^Talk 21:37, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

As of now the only source with some reliability is worldnetdaily. But it appears to be quite a partisan website. Such sources may be acceptable in some areas, but don't qualify as such for persons they themselves declare to be living.Bless sins 06:14, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

BlessSins, what about Asia Times? Forgot about that?--Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 01:24, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

We all know what the real issue here is. Bless sins doesn't think he is notable enough for inclusion.--Sefringle^Talk 02:41, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Whatever Sefringle, your provocations won't work with me. Matt57, I don't the "Asia times" source you are talking about.Bless sins 01:26, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Read the article to find the reference. --Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 15:31, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

As he authored part of a book called Leaving Islam: Apostates Speak Out which is published by Prometheus Books (my bold) then to anyone reasonable "Apostate" means what this article is listing.Ttiotsw 07:35, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Matt57, there are only three sources:

• Leaving Islam: Apostates Speak Out Prometheus Books (May 2003) ISBN 1-59102-068-9

• Warraq is not a reliable source, and you know that.

• Faith Freedom International- about

• FFI is not a reliable source

• Ex-Muslim's site trashes Muhammad

• Worldnet daily is a highly partisan source, not a neutral one like BBC and CNN.

What is the Asia Times source you are talking about?Bless sins 20:23, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

*Faith Freedom International- about FFI is owned by Ali Sina; this is practically a self-confession, or do you deny that the owner of FFI is Ali Sina?--Sefringle^Talk 08:27, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, and Warraq is a reliable source. All the 3 sources you listed above, they're more than enough to assert that Ali is a former muslim. --Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 02:43, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Can you justify how Warraq is a reliable source? Sefringle: how do we know that the person who wrote that was a Muslim? A non-Muslim can easily feign that.Bless sins 02:52, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Warraq is a well known and published author on Islam related topics. Sorry it will stay in. There are multiple sources confirming Ali Sina's apostasy. --Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 02:55, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

WP:RS says reliable sources "are regarded as trustworthy or authoritative in relation to the subject at hand" and "Articles should rely on reliable, third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy". Can you demonstrate that?Bless sins 03:06, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

This is futile as I mentioned. There are multiple sources confirming Ali's apostasy from Islam. Can you demonstrate that Warraq is not trustworthy? --Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 03:08, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

<reset>The onus is on you to demonstrate he is a reliable source. WP:V says "The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material." Who is adding the material here, me or you? You need to show how any one (that's all I require) source is reliable.Bless sins 01:04, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

The question of inclusion in this list is if the entry matches the criteria of "former" i.e. was but is not now. The reliability of the author Warraq is in fact irrelevant to this question because Ali Sina contributed a chapter to a book that is published by Prometheus Books. This is not a self-publishing house but an imprint that publishes many books from a wide variety of authors and in which science and humanism and the conflict with religion is a recurring theme. It is a "reliable" source and you are being unreasonable in claiming that a published book from a well known imprint in which the title clearly states Leaving Islam: Apostates Speak Out (my bold) isn't sufficient evidence to allow Ali Sina to be listed as a "former" Muslim. Why am I using Prometheus rather than the contents ? - because book publishers more or less control the book titles and jackets as part of the marketing of the book. So in the end the onus is on you to show Prometheus is unreliable. Ttiotsw 01:52, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Prometheus books is not reliable. Let me show you how. The publisher has published the following book: Hekmat, Anwar (1997). Women and the Koran The Status of Women in Islam. Amherst, New York: Prometheus Books. p. 209. ISBN 1-57392-162-9.. According to this book "Islamic is a clever propaganda simply created to allow Mohammed to do as he pleased". This book also calls Islam "a barbaric tradition". [3] The preceding sentences are an obvious example of an extremist source. The fact that you tie Ibn Warraq to Prometheus Books weakens your case.Bless sins 22:13, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

daniel ali appears twice

please includes people from www.answering-islam.org