Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bid’a


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Bid’a
The result was   Delete and redirect to Bid'ah. (Non-admin closure) Maashatra11 (talk) 15:41, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

This article is not written like an Wikipedia Article.There are no sourced information by author Max Viwe  |  Wanna chat with me?  07:51, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Since it written in the first person and gives advice, in contradiction of WP policies. However this does seem like an important topic. If the information is not already covered in other articles an article on the topic is possible, but probably under a English title so that non-Muslims can know what it is about. Kitfoxxe (talk) 08:31, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete/Redirect or Merge relevant content to Bid'ah. Maybe copyright violation, seems to have been copied from this link Maashatra11 (talk) 10:47, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete not because of notability (this is a notable topic) but because the article already exists! See Bid‘ah for something organized about this topic along the lines of an encyclopedia article.  I would do a simple rename to close this AfD, other than this current article smells like a copyvio and perhaps ought to be deleted before it is made into a redirect.  Due to the other article's controversial nature and already extensive treatment of this topic, I don't even see what benefit would come from merging the content of these two articles together would accomplish.  --Robert Horning (talk) 15:22, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:33, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Bid‘ah - This certainly is a notable subject, but an article already exists for it. DiiCinta (talk) 17:39, 28 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Speedy Delete as a copyvio and tagged as such. I've no objection to somebody creating a redirect after the material is deleted, but there is no good reason for keeping copyrighted material in a redirect history. -- Whpq (talk) 14:39, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.