Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thumama ibn Ashras


 * 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 speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn per AleatoryPonderings discovery. (non-admin closure)  // Timothy ::  talk  01:18, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Thumama ibn Ashras

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )


 * Delete: The article does not meet WP:GNG or WP:BASIC. WP:BEFORE revealed only passing mentions in Google Scholar and JSTOR, nothing that discusses the subject directly and in-depth. Sources in the article include one tertiary source and the other does not discuss the subject directly and in-depth. There could be additional sources are available that establish notability by discussing the subject directly and in-depth that I was not able to find. If found, I will gladly withdraw the nomination and switch to keep.  // Timothy ::  talk  23:20, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions.   // Timothy ::  talk  23:20, 5 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Two comments, leaning keep Keep:
 * This, at 227, describes ibn Ashras as the 'court theologian' of Al-Ma'mun. Strikes me as the 9th century equivalent of an endowed chair or substantial impact outside academia in their academic capacity per WP:NPROF.
 * Presumably a good number of sources would be in Arabic, which I do not read. Is there any way to find Arabic readers who might be able to help on this?
 * The reason I'm not yet a firm keep is that I haven't found WP:SIGCOV yet. But I find the 'court theologian' designation quite significant. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 23:55, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Now a firm keep., from a reputable academic publisher, has a profile of Thumama's life and views that runs from pages 171 to 185, with ample accompanying bibliography (mostly from medieval Arabic sources that I can't read). In my view, that's enough to pass WP:GNG. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 00:34, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 00:38, 6 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Speedy Keep per nomination, I happily withdraw the nomination. Hopefully this article is expanded. Thanks .  // Timothy ::  talk  01:16, 6 August 2020 (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.