- 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. Liz Read! Talk! 23:34, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
Harbi (Islamic law)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Harbi (Islamic law) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This article is extremely inadequately sourced and frankly baffling. It is currently almost entirely sourced to a defense college masters thesis, with some trivial secondary references to an online, possibly self-published direct translation of a single 14th-century sheikh - so that's a single primary source and a single sub-par secondary source. Harbi is also just a common Arabic word meaning pertaining to war/military/enemy, and it is not clearly established by this single thesis that it was widely used a standalone legal term outside of simply being used as a descriptive adjective or noun within the context of legal works. The Dar al-harb is a real term, and the term harbi is very briefly on that page with theoretically better sources than are present here, so maybe it is, but it is also are tricky to verify there. However, even accepting that it could be a legal jargon term used at some point, I'm still not sure that is sufficient to merit a standalone page outside of Dar al-harb, which is the only possible legal context in which this term could ever be used; it is otherwise wholly irrelevant. Outside of this, the quality issues speak for themselves, and, as an aside, this page was also created by a now blocked multiple account user, so has already dodged a bullet not being speedily deleted many moons ago. Iskandar323 ( talk) 15:35, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. Iskandar323 ( talk) 15:35, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
- Comment unsure what this is about. The FR wiki article talks about Harbi as a family name. May have been linked in error.
Oaktree b (
talk) 16:04, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
- @ Oaktree b: There's a separate disambiguation page for Harbi (without any parenthetical disambiguation) here too. Same thing; family name/people. Iskandar323 ( talk) 16:21, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
- Delete At best this is a dictionary definition of a single term while the main concept is already covered at Divisions of the world in Islam#Dar al-harb so it would be redundant. I have searched in Arabic to see if there is anything to indicate a discussion about the meaning of the term in Islamic law because such a debate would probably make the topic notable. Google search isn’t great in Arabic with this kind of non-specific term but I don’t see anything to suggest such a debate or sustained scholarly interest. Finding nothing else I turn to the sources cited. 1 and 2 are different versions of the same document. The first version is 1251 pages long and the inline indications of location don’t make sense in terms of indicating where in it the term ‘harbi’ might occur. The second version is 727 pages long and does contain a locator reference. However the given reference point Q4.17 doesn’t exist in it. The third source is an “unclassified thesis” for a Masters degree from a colonel in US military intelligence. Whatever the qualities of this author might be, I would not regard them as being an authority on Islamic law. So while this is at best a dictionary definition, it looks to me like some kind of synthesis of comments from disparate sources. Interestingly although the article makes reference to Ibn Rushd and Shaybani it doesn’t cite them so these are just unsupported claims. This is all much too flimsy to base an encyclopedia article on. Mccapra ( talk) 21:45, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
- Delete this example of what Wikipedia is not. Doczilla @SUPERHEROLOGIST 19:38, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
- 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.
- 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. Liz Read! Talk! 23:34, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
Harbi (Islamic law)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Harbi (Islamic law) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This article is extremely inadequately sourced and frankly baffling. It is currently almost entirely sourced to a defense college masters thesis, with some trivial secondary references to an online, possibly self-published direct translation of a single 14th-century sheikh - so that's a single primary source and a single sub-par secondary source. Harbi is also just a common Arabic word meaning pertaining to war/military/enemy, and it is not clearly established by this single thesis that it was widely used a standalone legal term outside of simply being used as a descriptive adjective or noun within the context of legal works. The Dar al-harb is a real term, and the term harbi is very briefly on that page with theoretically better sources than are present here, so maybe it is, but it is also are tricky to verify there. However, even accepting that it could be a legal jargon term used at some point, I'm still not sure that is sufficient to merit a standalone page outside of Dar al-harb, which is the only possible legal context in which this term could ever be used; it is otherwise wholly irrelevant. Outside of this, the quality issues speak for themselves, and, as an aside, this page was also created by a now blocked multiple account user, so has already dodged a bullet not being speedily deleted many moons ago. Iskandar323 ( talk) 15:35, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. Iskandar323 ( talk) 15:35, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
- Comment unsure what this is about. The FR wiki article talks about Harbi as a family name. May have been linked in error.
Oaktree b (
talk) 16:04, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
- @ Oaktree b: There's a separate disambiguation page for Harbi (without any parenthetical disambiguation) here too. Same thing; family name/people. Iskandar323 ( talk) 16:21, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
- Delete At best this is a dictionary definition of a single term while the main concept is already covered at Divisions of the world in Islam#Dar al-harb so it would be redundant. I have searched in Arabic to see if there is anything to indicate a discussion about the meaning of the term in Islamic law because such a debate would probably make the topic notable. Google search isn’t great in Arabic with this kind of non-specific term but I don’t see anything to suggest such a debate or sustained scholarly interest. Finding nothing else I turn to the sources cited. 1 and 2 are different versions of the same document. The first version is 1251 pages long and the inline indications of location don’t make sense in terms of indicating where in it the term ‘harbi’ might occur. The second version is 727 pages long and does contain a locator reference. However the given reference point Q4.17 doesn’t exist in it. The third source is an “unclassified thesis” for a Masters degree from a colonel in US military intelligence. Whatever the qualities of this author might be, I would not regard them as being an authority on Islamic law. So while this is at best a dictionary definition, it looks to me like some kind of synthesis of comments from disparate sources. Interestingly although the article makes reference to Ibn Rushd and Shaybani it doesn’t cite them so these are just unsupported claims. This is all much too flimsy to base an encyclopedia article on. Mccapra ( talk) 21:45, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
- Delete this example of what Wikipedia is not. Doczilla @SUPERHEROLOGIST 19:38, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
- 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.