Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Muhammad Hojjat Kouhkamare'i

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. Moved to Muhammad Hujjat Kuh-Kamari. (non-admin closure) clpo13_(talk) 08:51, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Muhammad Hojjat Kouhkamare'i

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

Fails GNG.......By a million light years. The references section seems to be "self created" as well. I would like voters to click on google search and see that we at Wikipedia are the only people who believe in the existence of this fine gentleman. FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 12:49, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In light of the new name given by HyperGaruda I would like to withdraw this nomination, provided that the page is renamed. FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 06:22, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Try Muhammad Hujjat Kuh-Kamari. But seriously though, those who don't know how to properly transliterate ar/fa-script make me cringe. I'd really like Mehdi ghaed -and others who are clearly not fluent in English- to use Wikipedia:Articles for creation instead of creating and moving articles to mainspace on their own. Please please please have your submissions checked by someone else first, I beg you. - HyperGaruda (talk) 15:07, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@HyperGaruda it still fails GNG as far as I can see. If you can just point me towards a source discussing this in depth, I'll incorporate it into the article. Regards FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 16:05, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@FreeatlastChitchat: I've added two seemingly reliable sources. Both had only a couple of sentences about the man, but it was enough to write a stub/start-class biography from birth to death. - HyperGaruda (talk) 20:59, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@HyperGaruda: can you please rename the page. If you are right that this guy is named Muhammad Hujjat Kuh-Kamari then I will withdraw this nomination. It was kinda shock to me to see that there was not a single mention of the guy on the entire internet. Regards FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 03:09, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry @FreeatlastChitchat:, but if you are not aware of how transliteration works (i.e. that there are multiple possible ways to write a Farsi/Arabic name in Latin letters, and that there isn't any 'right' or 'wrong' transliterations) then you shouldn't post AfDs on such topics. You can write محمد as 'Muhamed', 'Mohammed', 'Muhammed', 'Mohamed', 'Mahomet', etc. 'Kuh-Kamari' and 'Kouhkamare'i' are the same name. --Soman (talk) 11:00, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It is up to article creators to come up with the best name for a new article. The best transliteration is the one that is used the most in English sources. If the article creator cannot find transliterations in English sources, he/she should check WP:MOSAR or WP:PMOS for a standard "Wikipedian" transliteration, instead of guessing what it should be. - HyperGaruda (talk) 11:57, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Soman: and what does one do when confronted with an article which has zero mention in google? FreeatlastChitchat (talk) 13:59, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I would see the three interwikis (Arabi, Azeri, Farsi) and google on versions of the name. --Soman (talk) 20:06, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, i Think that references such as Al Daree of Aqa Bozorg and Maddarresi Tabrizi are popular and known..even you could see the name of book in these pages:Agha_Bozorg_Tehrani,Āqā Bozorg also compiled a biographical dictionary of Shiʿite scholars as a companion to al-Ḏarīʿa. The dictionary has the general title Ṭabaqāt aʿlām al-šīʿa, but each section, pertaining to the scholars of a given century, also has a separate title. Three sections have been published so far: Nawābeḡ al-rowwāt fī rābeʿat al-meʾāt (Beirut, 1390/1970), dealing with Shiʿite traditionists of the 4th Islamic century; al-Kerām al-mobarrara fi’l-qarn al-ṯāleṯ baʿd al-ʿašara (Naǰaf, 1374-77/1954-57), on scholars of the 13th century; and Noqabāʾ al-bašar fi’l-qarn al-rābeʿ ʿašar (Naǰaf, 1373-88/1953-68), on scholars of the 14th century.http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/aqa-bozorg-tehrani-shaikh--m,sharaf (talk) 15:21, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, seems to be sufficiently notable. See for example https://books.google.com/books?id=KGo3AQAAIAAJ, where he is referred to at ayatollah. https://books.google.com/books?id=AW64CAAAQBAJ&pg=PA595 mentions him as a 'great jurist' (الفقيه الكبير السيد محمد الحجة الكوهكمري). --Soman (talk) 16:03, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:02, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:02, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:02, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:02, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:02, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Passes WP:GNG considering the refs. It's another awkward nomination. Mhhossein (talk) 21:32, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and this seems applicable enough for now closing as historic subjects such as these will surely have better even if archived and unavailable coverage. SwisterTwister talk 06:09, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and move to Muhammad Hujjat Kuh-Kamari per WP:COMMONNAME. See also my comments above. - HyperGaruda (talk) 11:57, 17 December 2015 (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.