Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sayyed Ibn Tawus


 * 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   keep. (non-admin closure) DavidLeighEllis (talk) 15:37, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Sayyed Ibn Tawus

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Delete. While the subject of this article may be notable, the entire article violates WP:PEACOCK and falls short of a neutral position. The following sentences illustrate what I am talking about:

 Ormr2014 | Talk 15:45, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Sayyed Ibn Tawus (Arabic: سید ابن طاووس) was a prominent Shiite jurist
 * He was famous for meeting the twelfth Shiite imam, Muhammad al-Mahdi who according to Shiite was/ is living in occultation.
 * He is also famous for his library and his numerous works
 * One of his forefathers was a handsome man with ugly legs
 * His famous children were known by the name of their mother.
 * When Hulagu Khan conquered Baghdad, it is famous that he asked the Scholars of the city
 * It is famous that Ibn Tawus had direct contact with Muhammad al-Mahdi
 * Keep - WP:PEACOCK is not a reason for to propose AfD. Notability is what we are looking for - it seems there are suitable sources for notability. —Мандичка YO 😜 15:55, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep. The subject of the article appears to be notable.  I would guess that the editor(s) who created the article used peacock terms to demonstrate that the subject of the article was notable.  Whilst that was a stylistic error, the error is correctable.--  Toddy1 (talk) 16:17, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
 * In order for this article to meet Wikipedia's standards for inclusion, it would require a complete rewrite. In such cases, despite the notability of the subject matter, deletion is completely acceptable (See Starting from Scratch).


 * The use of Peacock terminology does not substantiate notability and even if that were the intent of the author, it still violates WP:Peacock.  Ormr2014 | Talk 16:38, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Articles that require complete rewrite are not necessarily suitable for deletion; they are suitable for rewrite. If you see an article that is clearly WP:PEACOCK, the action you should take is to rewrite the text or least just tag it. Please see WP:BEFORE. —Мандичка YO 😜 17:59, 17 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep-It should be rewritten or tagged with the Peacock or Peacock inline templates,not to be deleted.Salman mahdi (talk) 17:48, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Hello. The peacock terms are removed now. Hadi (talk) 18:39, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep In the Birth and family life section, I added more information about his nomination and its reason. The peacock terms is referred to Tawus means in English and is not referred WP:PEACOCK. Another reasons that mentioned above, was edited with other users.Papeli44 (talk) 06:12, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Can someone who speaks Persian please explain this user that WP:PEACOCK has nothing to do with the subject's name; nor does confusing and/or pretending to confuse the two things repeatedly make him any more or less notable.--Anders Feder (talk) 09:44, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Please read the article and then talk in this page. I added more information about Ibn Tawus name. I reed the WP:PEACOCK and know about it. Also, I explained that all problems solved. I think you have more problem with topic!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Papeli44 (talk) 10:49, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Please take a basic course in human social skills. You are clearly incompetent.--Anders Feder (talk) 11:06, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
 * You can think that I am incompetent and your mind is not important for me.Papeli44 (talk) 11:28, 18 May 2015 (UTC)Papeli44 (talk) 11:26, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iraq-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:59, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:59, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:59, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:59, 18 May 2015 (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.