Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Islamic view of the Pharaoh of the Exodus


 * 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   redirect to Moses in Islam.  MBisanz  talk 02:27, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Islamic view of the Pharaoh of the Exodus

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article is someone's personal commentary on the Koran. What Wikipedia is not says that Wikipedia is neither a publisher of original thought, nor a place to publish personal essays on readers' feelings bout some topic.

The original version of the article was in 2006. Various people have added and subtracted to it, but nobody have ever turned it into a proper article; and I do not think anyone ever will. My guess is that the only sources that could possibly exist for it are primary sources.

Until today, it had a primer in the references section telling readers which parts of the Koran refer to this topic. This primer was either a copyright violation or was original research, which was why a user removed it today. - Toddy1 (talk) 10:32, 6 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete. No secondary sources since creation in 2006.--Razionale (talk) 11:02, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Egypt-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:56, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:57, 6 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Moses in Islam. The Islamic traditions about the Pharaoh of Exodus and Moses are very closely linked because Pharaoh basically only appears as the opponent of Moses and the children of Israel.  Moses in Islam already duplicates much of this material in its coverage of Moses' encounter with Pharaoh (and is relatively better sourced) so a redirect is appropriate.  Moreover, redirects are cheap (WP:CHEAP). --Mike Agricola (talk) 17:30, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails WP:V--Shrike (talk)/WP:RX 19:17, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. It's the personal reflection of a seemingly retired editor. There isn't even anything to merge because all sources are primary. MezzoMezzo (talk) 05:31, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:TNT - somebody might be able to make an article out of this in the future, but this was not a good start. Bearian (talk) 20:06, 11 April 2013 (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.