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 --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 22:23, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mawlid al-Nabi Celebration Permissibility

[edit]

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

Book that has been tagged for notability since April 2015. Fails WP:GNG (specifically reliable+independent sources) based on GNews and GBooks results, as far as I can tell. - HyperGaruda (talk) 21:03, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. HyperGaruda (talk) 21:08, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. HyperGaruda (talk) 21:08, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I'm actually more concerned with the WP:NOTADVERTISING violation, though this might not be apparent to those who haven't followed the drama of the book's author. Qadri's followers have spammed Wikipedia for years, getting a number of themselves banned for reacting combatively when confronted with their promotionalism; he's a notable person but not everything he does or says is notable, and this random book he's published with no fanfare seems (I can't read minds, but we have several years of precedent to surmise this) like another failure to understand that. MezzoMezzo (talk) 05:37, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:24, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - No signs of a better notable article yet. SwisterTwister talk 05:17, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Searches did not turn up enough in-depth coverage to show the book passes notability criteria. Also, the WP:DEL4 would hold sway. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:38, 5 January 2016 (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.