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 keep. The later arguments to keep are substantial enough and have not been rebutted. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:41, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Those firmly rooted in knowledge

[edit]

AfDs for this article:

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Not notable. Yes, you will find some search results on google, but that's becuase Quranic verses get cited in religious books all the time. But that doesn't make this notable as an encyclopedic entry. Former AFD failed short of deletion due to lack of participation. You will find tonnes of results for other Quranic terms like "those who believe", "those who disbelieve" on google books. That doesn't make any of those phrases notable for an article here, nor it does to this one. AhmadLX-)¯\_(ツ)_/¯) 02:58, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 06:07, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. I could not find reliable sources discussing this concept in detail. --Cerebellum (talk) 09:09, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, as a Muslim I don't think this particular subject deserves an individual page. Mosaicberry (talk • contribs) 19:50, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep appears to barely pass notability with Neuwirth and Bar-Asher, and barely notable is still notable. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 23:49, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, T. Canens (talk) 00:37, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep/merge It took just a few seconds to find some detailed discussion of the phrase and its significance which is described as a "matter of great dispute". Maybe it would fit best in some larger page about Islamic theology and the Sunni/Shia schism but that's a matter of ordinary editing, not deletion, per WP:PRESERVE. Andrew D. (talk) 09:50, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Ulemas (علماء‎) are, almost by definition, "those firmly rooted in knowledge"(TFRIK). The root of the word is the same as that for knowledge (علم). The role of ulemas is clearly essential in Islam and the issue of their qualifications and role is a crucial one. The function of TFRIK is also a major marker of Shi'a and Sunni difference, with far reaching political implications. Since the issue is crucial, it gets hotly and massively debated. The discussion revolves essentially around the exegesis (Tafsir) of the phrase TFRIK. I don't know how WP rules are to be applied in this case , but the notability of the topic, i.e. of the actual meaning of this Quranic phrase in Islam, should be clear. 188.216.192.3 (talk) 13:00, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep/merge This is a Quranic term which has theoligical importance. It differs with Ulemas .--Seyyed(t-c) 01:58, 11 June 2019 (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.