Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hadith of the prediction in Sura al-Rum

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. Sarahj2107 (talk) 08:20, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hadith of the prediction in Sura al-Rum[edit]

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

Unable to verify that this is an actual hadith. The article was created by someone known for committing WP:OR/WP:SYNTH and this does not look like an exception. Of the six mentioned references, four are related to neither the hadith nor the surah in question and one is a primary source (the Qur'an itself). HyperGaruda (talk) 20:05, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. HyperGaruda (talk) 20:15, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete The article seems to be about a hadith about the wager between Ubayy ibn Khalaf and Abu Bakr and Muhammad's correction of the date of the time period of the predicted battle. Based on [1], it is a hadith in Sunan al-Tirmidhi. It is also discussed in tasfir (commentary on the Quran); this book cites it to the tasfir, Ruh al-Ma'ani and this book about al-Tabari's work cites it to his tasfir. Do we have a policy or even an essay on which hadith might be suitable for inclusion in wikipedia? The prediction itself is mentioned in the article on the Quran chapter related to the event, Ar-Rum. It is too minor an event in the life of Abu Bakr for the wager to be mentioned there. It could be mentioned at the page for Ubay ibn Khalaf. The battle was a part of the Byzantine–Sasanian War of 602–628, and I'm not sure if mention of it would fit there. I would support an article about the wager, as it is commonly used to show the ability of Muhammad to predict the future - and thus it could be added to Miracles of Muhammad. I think the issue here is that the title is OR and the article is unclear enough that it is hard to improve without totally rewriting it.

A common issue I feel when looking at articles like this one (often these are articles about concepts within Islam, but another connection is that they are written by people with apparently less good grasps of English) is that I could imagine an article that keeps parts of what they wrote, but under a different title and with substantial rewriting. I cannot be sure, however, that I am guessing correctly what they are getting at. I'm happy to make a suggestion as to their point, as I've done here, but if I'm not sure what such an article should look like, there is little improvement I can do. In this case, the title is about a hadith, not a story which may be an amalgamation of one or hadith (looking, I've read versions where Abu Bakr wins and where he loses the wager). If this is an article about a story, then why title it "hadith". If it is an article about a number of hadith, I only found one that matches. If it is about a single hadith, I'm not sure the one I found is the same version as the one referred in this article. Smmurphy^(Talk) 22:02, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 00:44, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:12, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- What the what? I don't see how this entry adds value to the project. This topic may or may not be notable, but it's not discernable from the page at all. Even if it were, this article ain't it. K.e.coffman (talk) 06:34, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It's hard to tell what this is even intended to be about, much less what it is trying to convey. At best, it's WP:OR or personal essay. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 22:10, 9 May 2017 (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.