Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Social class in the Muslim world


 * 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 move page to previous policy compliant version. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Steve Quinn (talk) 04:14, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Social class in the Muslim world

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Appears to be a low quality POV piece, containing WP:SYN synthesis. This topic and its subtopics have much higher quality coverage in at least two other articles: Islam and Muslim world. Fails GNG and contravenes NPOV and probably WP:V due to synthesis. In my opinion, the material here is not worth salvaging due to much higher quality coverage in other articles. Steve Quinn (talk) 05:35, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Withdrawn by nominator It appears to me, because the nominated article has attracted WP:SYN, a move to the previous version that complies with Wikipedia's content policies and notability guidelines will satisfy all current AfD participants. Therefore, a formal move request is in place (here) to restore the article space to the previously compliant version. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 04:14, 30 September 2016 (UTC)


 * I was about to nominate this for WP:G5 speedy deletion, when I found out that this page is actually the result of a cut-and-paste move from . In any case, delete per one big heap of WP:SYNTHESIS. --HyperGaruda (talk) 09:43, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. North America1000 17:21, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. North America1000 17:21, 24 September 2016 (UTC)


 * This does not qualify for speedy deletion, as it is really a mess of a cut and paste move and not actually created in violation of a ban. I think I have managed to properly restore everything to Social class among Muslims. NW ( Talk ) 02:30, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
 * OK thanks for doing all this. Steve Quinn (talk) 02:36, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
 * So wait a minute...which article is this deletion discussion in reference to, then? MezzoMezzo (talk) 03:39, 26 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Unless I'm missing something, this has been moved and cleaned up, and there isn't really a need for this discussion any longer...Vanamonde (talk) 05:18, 26 September 2016 (UTC)


 * This article was created as a spin-off from Caste_system_in_India, but right from the start it was misguidedly given the current title, which made it a magnet for synthesis. There are RSs, including those cited in the article, devoted to the topic of caste system among South Asian Muslims. We can have an article on that. The current article is obviously not even close to a general discussion of Social class among Muslims. It just tags on some vaguely caste-like examples under that broad category, violating WP:SYN and confusing caste with slavery, and other phenomena in the process. It should be trimmed down to the scope supported by the RSs and renamed to Caste system among South Asian Muslims. Eperoton (talk) 21:55, 26 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep User:Utcursch is not blocked as of 15:22, 27 September 2016 (UTC). However, the page is likely to contain original research. 86.22.8.235 (talk) 15:22, 27 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep per WP:DEL. This article was originally about caste system among South Asian Muslims (which even Encyclopædia Britannica has an article on). The scope and content of the article was changed to cover the entire world relatively recently, and the page was moved accordingly by Metaphysicswar (who has since been blocked as a sockpuppet). The original topic has multiple books dedicated to it (e.g. ), and also finds a mention in hundreds of other books (e.g. ). Not to mention journal/magazine articles (e.g. ), government reports (e.g. ), and news articles (e.g. ). I suggest moving the article back to its original title, and reducing its scope to the Indian subcontinent as before. utcursch &#124; talk 17:17, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
 * you have presented some excellent sources. Yet, most all of these pertain to Muslim society in India. That is more focused and is different from the topic of this article. I did notice one book "Sayyids and Sharifs in Muslim Societies" who are  "lineal descendants and relatives of the Prophet Muhammad". And these have honored positions that I am sure are acknowledged throughout the world. But this is very different from this article. This article is not even close to such a renown subject - which deserves quality coverage. This article is very much amateur hour and should not be representative of what Wikipedia offers on Muslim societies throughout the world. Steve Quinn (talk) 01:34, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
 * The current version does look like bad synthesis. But it is completely different from the original article. Here's a version from 2007. It was located at Caste system among South Asian Muslims. This version, IMHO, is salvageable. I'm proposing that the article be moved back to something close this version, at its original location. utcursch &#124; talk 01:39, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I see what you mean. This is a much better article. Below is recommending a move proposal be initiated on the article talk page, so the article's history and the needed sourced content can be saved. So perhaps a proposed move to this version is in order. And I need to somehow drop this AfD, but since there are two other delete Ivotes I'm not sure how to do this. I think the main issue is changing the current state of the article back to the well sourced version, then everyone will be satisfied. I am thinking the move can be an informal thread, unless someone thinks a formal move request with a template is needed. Well, waiting to hear back Steve Quinn (talk) 02:52, 30 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete. I'm really concerned about the novel synthesis aspects here. Whatever social structures are in place in Algeria are certainly unrelated to those among Muslim communities in India. I don't see anything in the references that suggests that the over-arching concept here "social class in the Muslim world" is a recognized topic. Rather, this is an assembly of bits about several different concepts. I'm willing to be convinced otherwise on this point, but if the sources exist to pull that off, I'd really like to see this sort of thing assembled in Draft or userspace before dumped in main; this isn't it. Separate articles on the interaction between Islam and existing social strata in various regional contexts are probably better-supported by the sources anyway. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 20:56, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:BEFORE. I've seen a lot worse, and the synthesis can parts can be fixed. I think normal editing processes can fix the serious issues that have been raised. Bearian (talk) 00:23, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment one of the main points I was trying to emphasize (as the nominator) is this material has much better coverage in the other Muslim and Islam related articles. The original creator of this article does not seem to have an in depth understanding of this topic - based on what is written. This person seems to have basically cobbled together what he or she thinks this topic is according to their point of view - as in synthesis. I don't think there is a modern recognized social class system in the Muslim world - spanning the globe - and there is agreement by most or all of the various Muslim communities throughout the world as to what this is. I think it is better to allow coverage in the other Muslim and Islam articles where editors know about nuances related to this. Steve Quinn (talk) 01:05, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment if someone is willing to create an article such as "Caste system among South Asian Muslims" which was the original intention, then I say please go ahead and do so, based on the article refs and whatever relevant sources have been presented here. But I think it is best to delete this article (imho), rather than waiting for someone to correct all the synthesis - which has been pointed out above as the inadvertent mixing of topics under this title.  Steve Quinn (talk) 01:16, 30 September 2016 (UTC)


 * If the article was deleted, its history, including the sourced content on the caste system among South Asian Muslims would be lost. What we need to do is propose a move of the article to Caste system among South Asian Muslims on its talk page, then vote for the move, and once it's moved, delete the extraneous content. Eperoton (talk) 02:37, 30 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment - based on the discussion at this AfD, I have opened a move proposal on the article talk page here . --Steve Quinn (talk) 03:16, 30 September 2016 (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.