Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Islam and Arabic language


 * 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.

The result was Draftify‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. I'm closing this discussion as Draftify. As far as I can tell, this just means that it needs to be submitted for an AFC review before returning to main space. I just hope it gets improved. Feel free to have a rename discussion on the draft talk page. Liz Read! Talk! 22:58, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Islam and Arabic language

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Does not meet WP:NPOV; relies heavily on direct quotes. (talk | contribs) 13:34, 9 April 2024 (UTC) :I have improved the references now. Bengali editor (talk) 13:56, 9 April 2024 (UTC) Sock, see Sockpuppet investigations/Lazy-restless ::See the recent sourcing, it is better sourced now. Bengali editor (talk) 14:41, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language, Religion,  and Islam.   (talk | contribs) 13:34, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Draftify: I agree with sephenMacky1. I do not want the article to be deleted but improved. FuzzyMagma (talk) 14:58, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Draftify. I feel like the article can be improved, but as it currently stands, it really lacks NPOV and reliable sources. StephenMacky1 (talk) 14:23, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
 * It still mostly contains direct quotations.  (talk | contribs) 14:42, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Bengali editor (talk) 14:52, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
 * How is this not a direct quotation?  (talk | contribs) 14:56, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Bengali editor (talk) 14:59, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Draftify for aforementioned reasons. Also, maybe retitle to something simpler like "Arabic in Islam".
 * Slamforeman (talk) 15:00, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Additionally, should this article remain, I'd say it'd be useful to have similar articles like Hebrew in Judaism and Sant Bhasha in Sikhism. Slamforeman (talk) 16:03, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Jewish languages. Bengali editor (talk) 22:08, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Bengali editor (talk) 23:52, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom/ WP:NOTESSAY. samee  converse  20:57, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
 * The scholar you quoted, Elwood Morris Wherry, was an Islam scholar.  (talk | contribs) 23:54, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
 * "Non-muslim" islam scholar. Bengali editor (talk) 01:37, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't know much about religion, but doesn't Muslim mean someone who believes in Islam?  (talk | contribs) 01:38, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes. And there is also more entries from non-Islam non-muslim scholars also. 01:45, 10 April 2024 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bengali editor (talk • contribs)
 * And that's a problem. You said "Check out last changes and the section opinion of non-muslim scholars", but the opinions you added were Muslim.  (talk | contribs) 01:48, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Nope, in the section opinion of non muslim scholars, no one is muslim. Bengali editor (talk) 02:47, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Wait... so Islamic scholars aren't Muslim?  (talk |

contribs) 02:49, 10 April 2024 (UTC) :::::::::Nope. There are many non muslim scholars of Islam, means they are scholars of Islam but doesn't believe in it. List of non-Muslim authors on Islam, Category:Non-Islamic Islam studies literature, Category:Christian scholars of Islam, Category:Jewish scholars of Islam, Category:Muslim scholars of Islam, Category:Non-Muslim scholars of Islam and Category:Scholars of Islam by religion. Bengali editor (talk) 03:46, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
 * This is an article about a theological doctrine. You seem to be confused by the academic field of religious studies, in which people can be of any religion and still discuss others. Nevertheless, even if this article exclusively cited devout Muslims, those could still be NPOV as Muslim clergy are experts in their own religion. Nearly every theological doctrine will necessarily have to cite to its believers. For instance, a quick perusal of shows quite a few devout Christian theologians. Dan • ✉ 05:48, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

*Keep Classical Quranic Arabic in Quran and Hadith literature is considered the most divine miraculous language in Islam as muslim scholars say the linguistic divine secret knowledges of original Arabic Quran can never be completely transformed into translation in any other form of languages. Moreover, using original arabic dictations in prayers (salat) and prophetic rituals such as Hajj is obligatory also. The traditions of Muhammad including the quotes and deeds of Muhammad are also preserved much carefully in original Arabic (Ilm al-Rijal) without any minimal distortion. Bengali editor (talk) 17:41, 13 April 2024 (UTC) Sock, see Sockpuppet investigations/Lazy-restless. Relisting comment: Please do not move this article until after the AFD is closed. If the decision is that the article will be Kept, then a article page move can be considered. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:43, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Draftify per StephenMacky1. 三葉草 San Yeh Tsao 23:55, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep There is a special status for the Arabic language in Islam.Salah Almhamdi (talk) 16:29, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep This article is without a doubt a useful and encyclopedic article – I was Googling for this topic specifically when I came across the article and was surprised to learn that not only was it new but that some editors want to delete it. I'm having trouble understanding how the nominator considers it NPOV for having direct quotes. Maybe mixing it up with original research? Nevertheless, direct quotes from the Quran to support the assertion that the Quran makes a statement about something isn't really original research. And in response to the draftify proposals: I think this article is more than ready for mainspace. Sure it's fairly heavy on blockquotes, but it's referenced, structured, formatted cleanly, and has a good discussion of its main topic. Dan • ✉ 05:38, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment – when I found this article and voted in the AfD it had already been moved to the title Arabic in Islam. I prefer that title and think the page should be moved back there after closure. Dan • ✉ 04:13, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Comment - This is absolutely encyclopedic. Whether it should be kept or draftified is something I'm not prepared to outright decide, but I'd say that it is definitely notable enough to be an article. That said, it definitely has several, substantial issues. Ships  &amp;  Space (Edits) 01:31, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment – The article creator was just banned for sockpuppetry and the article under G5. I've removed the CSD notice as I do think I'd like to work on this article more. Dan • ✉ 00:46, 20 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Keep Agree with @Dan Leonard. Grabup (talk) 09:24, 22 April 2024 (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.