Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hadith of Virtues of Persia People

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 delete. Spartaz ^Humbug! 19:04, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hadith of Virtues of Persia People

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article is not notable and uses primarily primary sources to push a POV. It has one non-primary source which is unreliable. Mbcap (talk) 01:19, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. Lakun.patra (talk) 13:54, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. Lakun.patra (talk) 13:54, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. Lakun.patra (talk) 13:54, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The hadith obviously has a POV, but the article does not. Is it being claimed that the article misrepresents the available sources on the hadith? DGG ( talk ) 22:11, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

DGG I agree that the hadith has a POV but my issue is that this article does not have established notability. Since the hadith is a primary source, we cannot have an article on it if it is not covered in reliable secondary or tertiary sources. I was unable to find any reliable book or academic articles on the hadith. Therefore my question is how do we know that the hadith is notable enough to warrant its own article? Mbcap (talk) 23:47, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

But it like all hadith is discussed in extensive secondary scholarship on hadith, some of which seems to be cited. There's undoubtedly more, for the analysis of the transmission of hadith was a key aspect of traditional islamic scholarship and jurisprudence DGG ( talk ) 02:23, 28 March 2015 (UTC) .[reply]

Actually there is no citation to a reliable secondary source on the article. Could you possibly provide a source? Mbcap (talk) 02:35, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:34, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 03:11, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Lack of secondary resources in the article is very obvious. ●Mehran ^Debate● 06:27, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is a religious essay (violates WP:NOTESSAY) written in obscure theocratic style. The one source that might provide backing seems to be a theological journal from contemporary Iran, a theocratic republic based on medieval ideas, ergo not compatible with empirical context of Wikipedia WP:CONTEXTMATTERS. It's not a reliable source. This article could be titled "Mohammed talks about the good qualities of the Persian people." Tapered (talk) 09:41, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.