The result of the debate was No consensus. Ral315 (talk) 09:42, 30 December 2005 (UTC) reply
It is likely that this will be moved to ' List of Hadith' if kept. Please take this into account when voting.
The title of this article is problematic, its scope is potentially enormous, and there is no NPOV criterion for choosing which "reports", or Hadith, are notable.
The title is problematic because "Muslim reports" is a very poor translation of "hadith". Hadith, or formally collected oral tradition, is an accepted, widely used term in Islamic studies. The user who created this article seems to prefer NOT to use Arabic terms of art in discussing Islam-related articles. Anyone searching for articles about hadith would not find this one.
But there are bigger problems than the title. There are many thousands of hadith. Bukhari and Muslim, the first two books of the Sunni canon, contain over 17,000 hadiths. There are four other Sunni books, as well as Shi'a collections. Is this article going to contain them all? The creator of the article says that only "notable" hadiths should be included, but he offers no criterion for notability. All the hadiths he has selected so far have to do with the long tradition of Sunni-Shi'a polemics, and prominently feature hadith used by the Shi'a in attempts to prove that the Shi'a are right and the Sunni are wrong. (The editor is a Shi'a.) However, hadith cover hundreds of other topics as well. If we included the most cited hadith for each of these topics (such as salat, zakat, hijab, inheritance, etc.) we would have an article as long as a book.
I asked the creator to consider picking another title and narrowing the scope of the article. An article on Hadith from the Sunni canon frequently cited by the Shi'a would be manageable and perhaps even useful, since the Shi'a editors keep listing the same hadiths, over and over, in various Islam-related articles. However, the creator -- with whom I have not been getting along -- refuses.
If someone else could persuade him to change the title and narrow the scope of the article, we could drop this whole AfD. Can anyone do so? Zora 05:15, 18 December 2005 (UTC) reply
Yeah, whadever:
And that is a random and small sample from A in Wikipedia:List_of_lists/uncategorized. I wont bother with B-Z Try to make a list of list, there you have a big one...
Here is another thing for you: List of article created by User:Striver and nominated for deleting by User:Zora that did not get deleted:
Zora said that i have only included narrations that are relevant to Shi'a Sunni discutions. Well, that makes them notable, doesnt it? Wikipedia is not a paper encylopedia, we dont delet lists only since they could be big. In fact, just the fact that it could become big makes it notable. IF it gets to big, will create breakout articles. Regarding notablility and NPOV, its the usual WP rules.
I did not choose "Hadith", since it would exluded non-"hadith" material, for example "Sira", letters and sermons. -- Striver 05:31, 18 December 2005 (UTC) reply
I would like to remind people:
If we have this Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matthew 1:verses, then there is no reason to not have a list of hadith. Nobody is going to bother to include random non-notable hadith. If you belive a hadith is biased or non-notable, vote down the hadith, not the list. This vote is not about weather WP shoudl have articles on hadith, only about linking to the existing hadith from a list. Nothing more. You dont like the hadith in the list? Add some of your own. You dont like a specific hadith? Improve that hadith, or afd it, not this list -- Striver 13:21, 19 December 2005 (UTC) reply
-- Striver 03:59, 20 December 2005 (UTC) reply
The result of the debate was No consensus. Ral315 (talk) 09:42, 30 December 2005 (UTC) reply
It is likely that this will be moved to ' List of Hadith' if kept. Please take this into account when voting.
The title of this article is problematic, its scope is potentially enormous, and there is no NPOV criterion for choosing which "reports", or Hadith, are notable.
The title is problematic because "Muslim reports" is a very poor translation of "hadith". Hadith, or formally collected oral tradition, is an accepted, widely used term in Islamic studies. The user who created this article seems to prefer NOT to use Arabic terms of art in discussing Islam-related articles. Anyone searching for articles about hadith would not find this one.
But there are bigger problems than the title. There are many thousands of hadith. Bukhari and Muslim, the first two books of the Sunni canon, contain over 17,000 hadiths. There are four other Sunni books, as well as Shi'a collections. Is this article going to contain them all? The creator of the article says that only "notable" hadiths should be included, but he offers no criterion for notability. All the hadiths he has selected so far have to do with the long tradition of Sunni-Shi'a polemics, and prominently feature hadith used by the Shi'a in attempts to prove that the Shi'a are right and the Sunni are wrong. (The editor is a Shi'a.) However, hadith cover hundreds of other topics as well. If we included the most cited hadith for each of these topics (such as salat, zakat, hijab, inheritance, etc.) we would have an article as long as a book.
I asked the creator to consider picking another title and narrowing the scope of the article. An article on Hadith from the Sunni canon frequently cited by the Shi'a would be manageable and perhaps even useful, since the Shi'a editors keep listing the same hadiths, over and over, in various Islam-related articles. However, the creator -- with whom I have not been getting along -- refuses.
If someone else could persuade him to change the title and narrow the scope of the article, we could drop this whole AfD. Can anyone do so? Zora 05:15, 18 December 2005 (UTC) reply
Yeah, whadever:
And that is a random and small sample from A in Wikipedia:List_of_lists/uncategorized. I wont bother with B-Z Try to make a list of list, there you have a big one...
Here is another thing for you: List of article created by User:Striver and nominated for deleting by User:Zora that did not get deleted:
Zora said that i have only included narrations that are relevant to Shi'a Sunni discutions. Well, that makes them notable, doesnt it? Wikipedia is not a paper encylopedia, we dont delet lists only since they could be big. In fact, just the fact that it could become big makes it notable. IF it gets to big, will create breakout articles. Regarding notablility and NPOV, its the usual WP rules.
I did not choose "Hadith", since it would exluded non-"hadith" material, for example "Sira", letters and sermons. -- Striver 05:31, 18 December 2005 (UTC) reply
I would like to remind people:
If we have this Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matthew 1:verses, then there is no reason to not have a list of hadith. Nobody is going to bother to include random non-notable hadith. If you belive a hadith is biased or non-notable, vote down the hadith, not the list. This vote is not about weather WP shoudl have articles on hadith, only about linking to the existing hadith from a list. Nothing more. You dont like the hadith in the list? Add some of your own. You dont like a specific hadith? Improve that hadith, or afd it, not this list -- Striver 13:21, 19 December 2005 (UTC) reply
-- Striver 03:59, 20 December 2005 (UTC) reply