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. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 17:20, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There is absolutely nothing on this topic (neologism - ?) other than a single book—Creating a New Medina: State Power, Islam, and the Quest for Pakistan in Late Colonial North India—, written in 2015 by one Venkat Dhulipala and book-reviews thereof. There is a potential article to be written about the book but this is not it.The book has been subject to harsh criticism from a variety of quarters but not unsurprisingly, Dhulipala believes all of them (Faisal Devji, Barbara D. Metcalf, Yasmin Khan, and Manan Ahmed Asif) to be in the wrong and peddling half-truths, lies and distortions. In summary, we are looking at a revolutionary fringe work - if it were not, the concept might have stood a chance of being notable in itself.TrangaBellam (talk) 16:59, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The article barely talks about "New Medina" and almost all the sources are "background" except for the one book mentioned by OP. Obvious WP:OR. --RegentsPark (comment) 17:30, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
RegentsPark, the creator even got a DYK of the article. A ridiculously ahistorical line—Pakistan was envisioned as the New Medina to be used as a staging point for the conquest and Islamisation of India, similar to the conquest of Mecca by Muhammad—was featured on the Main Page for a good 24 hours, based on a primary source. A case is to be made for why all DYKs related to Indian history/politics shall be advertised on WT:INB before passing to main page. TrangaBellam (talk) 07:35, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Do they even read the article before slapping a DYK on it? Yes, we need to have a system of checking DYKs before they get posted. God knows what sort of stuff gets publicized there. --RegentsPark (comment) 13:58, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The issue with DYK is that it compels nominators to review other DYKs and thus, we see random editors reviewing random DYKs about topics way outside of their usual domains of editing. TrangaBellam (talk) 15:17, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I promoted the article and assumed good faith on the part of the nominator and reviewer due to not being able to access the print sources. I read the article, but it doesn't do much good when I don't know the topic. It did go through an admin after I promoted it and then was sent to the main page. Also, editors had plenty of time to bring up issues on ERRORS even before it hit the main page. SL93 (talk) 01:03, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: A BEFORE search brings nothing about this. Uh, this is without foundation: Allah's "secret design" for PakistanWP:FRINGE. --Whiteguru (talk) 02:42, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: None of the sources here, as far as I see, really discuss or establish the notability of "New Medina" Deathlibrarian (talk) 10:56, 20 December 2021 (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.