Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Banu al-Akhdari

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. I see no basis for the last relist as there is a delete consensus reached through discussion among participating editors. As such I am closing. Barkeep49 (talk) 15:51, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Banu al-Akhdari[edit]

[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)

It lacks reliable primary/secondary sources. I can't find any reliable (arabic and english) sources about this tribe. I just can't find any evidence of this tribe actually existing. Surprisingly, the original french version of this article was consensually removed. TheseusHeLl (talk) 20:09, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions. TheseusHeLl (talk) 20:09, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Algeria-related deletion discussions. TheseusHeLl (talk) 20:25, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete the sources provided aren’t reliable and a search in Arabic doesn’t show anything else. Mccapra (talk) 21:58, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Banu roughly means tribe in Arabic. There were many tribes in Arabia. There is not much to speak of as defines this tribe, but I can see List of Banu's with this tribe being just one. The Q'uran mentions a few Banu's including at least one Jewish tribe, that was slaughtered on orders of Muhammad.Oldperson (talk) 01:20, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The jewish tribe you're talking about is Banu Qurayza. The other jewish tribes are listed in this page. Actually, Banu means "son's of", "descendants of", etc. The meaning of this word could mean a tribe, a clan, a family, etc. So what's your point? I'm requesting the deletion of a non existing arab tribe. Having the word Banu + the name of an ancestor doesn't mean that the tribe exists -TheseusHeLl (talk) 04:04, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I also searched under 'أولاد الاخضر' and 'أولاد الاخضريً' in case that turned up anything either, but it didn’t. It is possible that the article is a hoax, or that it records some kind of folk belief, but there aren’t any sources I can find to support it, Mccapra (talk) 07:24, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Based on the Arabic-language article, I think the correct name of this tribe is 'بنو الأخضر', which produces google books results. It's the tribe of Al-Akhdari. I think the google books sources are enough for a presumption of notability, there are likely to be more offline sources as well. --Cerebellum (talk) 20:58, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

*Changing my vote to Keep per Cerebellum. I’m not sure why I didn’t find these sources when I searched, but there you go. There’s enough here to show they existed and were notable. The article needs to be moved to ‘Banu al-Akhdar’ to be consistent with the sources. Mccapra (talk) 07:03, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Mccapra, Cerebellum: I didn't notice this! But there is another problem. I can't find secondary sources confirming the claims in this article, and when searching "بنو الأخضر" the two first results are unreliable (the works of Tarek Gahlan) and all the other results are about the Banu Ukhaidhir, the rulers of yamama (بنو الأخضير, misspelling of بنو الأخضير, بنو الأخضير, etc). -TheseusHeLl (talk) 14:49, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In general, the extracted text of Arabic books in google books is full of data errors. So the problem here is that if you're searching "بنو الأخضر" in google books it gives you بنو الأخضير and بنو الأخضير's misspellings as بنو الأخضر. -TheseusHeLl (talk) 15:55, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@TheseusHeLl: Hmm you're probably right, I didn't catch that those were referring to the Banu Ukhaidhir. Why are the works of Tarek Gahlan unreliable? --Cerebellum (talk) 09:48, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment @TheseusHeLl: ok this is getting tougher and tougher. I've never been sure how reliable Google searches are in Arabic and only being able to see a snippet view is not helpful. As you say we can't substantiate most of the claims made in the article, and the ar.wiki article doesn't have any sources at all. I'm inclining back towards my original delete vote. Mccapra (talk) 17:22, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Mccapra:I'm beginning to suspect that this might be a hoax of some kind. It's some kind of folk belief (like you said) and the editor who created the page is part of that culture. Both this page's french version and its fork were deleted in fr.wiki. -TheseusHeLl (talk) 18:10, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 15:15, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Cerebellum: All of his books are published by lulu.com (a.k.a self-published) -TheseusHeLl (talk) 17:43, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, in that case delete. --Cerebellum (talk) 19:20, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yup I’ve come back to Delete as well. Mccapra (talk) 20:49, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Fifthavenuebrands (talk) 13:21, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To get clear consensus
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NNADIGOODLUCK (Talk|Contribs) 15:28, 21 November 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.