Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Lexicon of modern 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 no consensus. &mdash; Coffee //  have a cup  //  beans  // 13:15, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

The Lexicon of modern arabic language

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I simply could not find any hits about this book whatsoever. CSD was declined by on the grounds that A7 does not apply to books. An article on the book's author (Ahmed Mukhtar Omar) created by this article's creator is currently up for speedy deletion. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 05:58, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 05:59, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 05:59, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment. I believe this may be a legitimate scholarly book; I found an entry for it in a library catalog under the title "Muʻjam al-lughah al-ʻArabīyah al-muʻāṣirah" by Aḥmad Mukhtār ʻUmar. However, this article in its current form does not contain enough information to warrant keeping as is. If there are sources to establish this book as notable per WP:NBOOK, those sources are likely in Arabic and someone will have to find them and cite them in this article. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:00, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. I could not find an actual review of the book, but I did find a few Arabic sources that make me think it is notable.  The Arabic Wikipedia has articles for both the author: ar:أحمد مختار عمر and the book: ar:معجم اللغة العربية المعاصرة.  There is a description of the book on an Islamic site called al-Meshkat, which comes close to being a review.  And the book is cited a few times as a standard dictionary, with its definitions quoted:, , .  There are a few more citations at Google Scholar. So no smoking gun of notability, but a decent amount of suggestive evidence.  If the article is kept, I'll add the al-Meshkat source and a bit more information, though it will still be a stub. --Cerebellum (talk) 23:15, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 14:31, 3 February 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment Should the article be kept, I suggest that the article be moved to a more appropriate title that meets our Manual of Style. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:23, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  CAPTAIN RAJU  (✉)   22:57, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. The Article is only 2 sentences with no References. It is also probably a remnant, seeing how its only link is targeted to another deleted Article. On a slightly off-topic note, the capitalization error in the Title is hilarious. The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 03:39, 11 February 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.