Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Islamic law in Constantinople


 * 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 delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 17:47, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Islamic law in Constantinople

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:OR and WP:NOTESSAY article on a dubious topic: the author somehow conflates Byzantine history between 1204 and 1453 and the Ottoman era, the Byzantine society with Shari'a law and Mehmed II's treatment of the patriarchate, etc. The topic of the article is rather unclear, and its structure doesn't make clear what arguments the author advances. Constantine  ✍  12:33, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 14:09, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 14:10, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:54, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:54, 7 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete - It hardly has anything to do with the topic described in the page name, and as was pointed out on its talk page when created it reads like an essay, and one with the distorted frame of reference pointed out by the nom. The majority of the article isn't even about shari'a, but rather is about pre-conquestt Byzantine bureaucracy, while the final section on actual post-conquest shari'a (supposedly the topic) seems almost an afterthought, with generalities about shari'a that seem to represent synthesis and parts reading like personal opinion/essay, a tone that has been in the article from the start.  While there may be a place on Wikipedia to discuss the implementation of Islamic law on the newly-conquered citizenry of Constantinople, this isn't it, and misses the mark to such a degree that it appears to be a case for WP:TNT. Agricolae (talk) 17:37, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete - I agree with Agricolae. An article with this title could be suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia. This content could possibly be useful at an article with a different title. I'd support some more complicated solution (such as WP:HEY or draftify if someone wanted to take on the project) if someone were willing to enact it, but as it is, this is not encyclopedic content under this title and it has been tagged long enough that no fix is likely. Smmurphy(Talk) 19:07, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete or Draftify content is important and subject is also notable. But right now it reads like an essay. D4iNa4 (talk) 14:31, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Probably delete possibly userify to give the creator an opportunity to resolve its issues. The article is trying to deal with two separate subjects.  (1) Byzantium was a weak state between 1204 and 1453.  There is an opportunity to explain to what extent (if any) there were Muslims (e.g. merchants) in Constantinople before 1453 and to what extent they were allowed to live under their own laws.  (2) the Islamisation of the city after 1453 is a separate topic: the question is then the extent to which Christians were permitted to live under their own laws and (perhaps) to what extent Roman law still applied in commerce.  Each of these might be capable of making a worthwhile article, perhaps with an intervening section on how Sharia law was applied in and just after 1453.  The present article just will not do.  Peterkingiron (talk) 16:49, 10 November 2017 (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.