Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shia view of Muawiyah I
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 no consensus. LFaraone 00:41, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Shia view of Muawiyah I[edit]
- Shia view of Muawiyah I (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This page is a poorly sourced POV fork of Muawiyah I; some of it appears to be original research. It does not adhere to NPOV. Everything that needs to be said is already said in the article on Muawiyah I. The article on Muawiyah I is heavily loaded with the anti-Umayyad POV. So this one is redundant. The best thing to do would be to turn this into a redirect. Toddy1 (talk) 23:46, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:05, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:05, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Another one of Striver's Answering-Ansar/al-islam.org WP:OR creations. MezzoMezzo (talk) 03:58, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, as it is Shia view article so it will have Shia Sources. Then out of 10 (actually 16) only 3 are from Answering-Ansar/al-islam.org --Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haidertcs 07:05, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 19:48, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 02:54, 28 June 2013 (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.