This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bibliographies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Bibliographies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BibliographiesWikipedia:WikiProject BibliographiesTemplate:WikiProject BibliographiesBibliographies
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Atheism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of atheism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AtheismWikipedia:WikiProject AtheismTemplate:WikiProject AtheismAtheism
Add Atheism info box to all atheism related talk pages (use {{WikiProject Atheism}} or see info box)
Ensure atheism-related articles are members of Atheism by checking whether [[Category:Atheism]] has been added to atheism-related articles – and, where it hasn't, adding it.
Try to expand stubs. Ideas and theories about life, however, are prone to generating neologisms, so some stubs may be suitable for deletion (see deletion process).
State atheism needs a reassessment of its Importance level, as it has little to do with atheism and is instead an article about anti-theist/anti-religious actions of governments.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy
I am removing listings which are unsourced as to whether they actually contain criticism of Christianity and are by non-notable authors. I am leaving in works by authors with articles if I can tell, looking at the article, that the work probably qualifies - although ideally we would want to source each one with a review that mentions its criticism of Christianity.Brianyoumans (talk) 01:47, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
To be honest, this is the kind of article that I think should just be deleted - some random person threw up a start on it years ago, it's had a few random additions over the years, but no one is really maintaining it, it doesn't have a clear description or focus, it isn't in any way comprehensive or well-researched. But if I tried to take it to AFD people would say it was a great start, there would be a few token references and additions added, the AFD would fail, and then the article would sit here and molder for another decade, useful only for someone to point to and say, "Look, Wikipedia is full of pointless listcruft like this!" Grump. Well, I think I improved it a bit. Rant off.Brianyoumans (talk) 14:38, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, I actually had not noticed before I wrote the comment above - someone already AFDed it in 2019 and that's exactly what happened!Brianyoumans (talk) 14:40, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Reading through the deletion discussion (what there was of it, it wasn't extensive), there was considerable diversity of opinion as to what the article should look like - only notable books, only notable books and/or notable authors, anything as long as it criticizes Christianity... And what exactly *is* "criticism of Christianity"? Philosophical criticism? Cultural? (Much of what I removed seemed to be Indian works complaining about Christian conversions of Hindus, as far as I can tell.) Negative criticism or constructive criticism? I don't know, it seems vague to me. But I'll leave it alone. If you have experience with similar articles maybe you could improve this one. Brianyoumans (talk) 20:15, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As it stands, this article is a bit of a dumping ground for general New Atheism books which are not specific to just Christianity and are more "anti-religion" in general. There is not much meat here. If we look at Bibliography of books critical of Islam as a comparison, that article features books which are more indepth and just about that specific subject. There are a few here like Christianity Unveiled which are indeed specific. Do we need a Bibliography of books critical of religion as a broader category? Also we should probably mention the agenda of the authors of some of these books, notably the Hindutva books authored by people who are big-mad about evangelisation. JustAChurchMouse (talk) 21:34, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I partially agree, partially disagree with your assessment. Several of the books listed may be grouped as New Atheist, which are a critique of religion(s) in general, but have a special focus on the Abrahamic religions. There is some overlap with Bibliography of books critical of Islam and Bibliography of books critical of Judaism for that reason. These two have been monitored somewhat closely to exclude plain antisemitism and anti-Muslim bigotry, although it may sometimes be hard to separate them neatly from criticism of the religions rather than their followers. Incidentally, your last comment might be worth discussing further, as we haven't yet got a bibliography of books critical of Hinduism or Hindutva. In practice it is also difficult to separate those two. I also know some Wikipedians would oppose it if we tried to write such an article, claiming that this or that author is not important, Hinduphobic or racist, or the criticism is not against Hinduism as such but Hindutva or vice versa, or that neither of those things are religions in a "Western" sense, etc.
