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.
Keep: The title is its own distinct term referring to one side of an internal schism within the
PMOI that is currently inadequately examined on that page. It might be considered a child article of
the schism on that page, and, were it currently a part of that page, it would make for a viable split, since Google Scholar yields plenty of
unique scholarly hits for the specific term. The current overlap with the
PMOI article is meanwhile incredibly low: the term "Muslim Mojahedin" is not even referenced there, despite being reliably attested in academic sources. So, there is little obvious duplication, no clear reason for deletion and good reason to retain the article as a viable child article. Were there space on
PMOI to merge the content back in, that could have been an alternative, but, as it is, the page is already over-length, and that is not the topic here.
Iskandar323 (
talk) 12:25, 12 August 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete per
WP:POVFORK. "Muslim Mojahedin" is only a term, in this instance used to differentiate
People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran from
another group (which is something that's already analyzed in both of those articles). I don't see anything new or notable enough to move to the other articles, and a redirect isn’t a good idea because the term is also used as reference for many other groups. This is a (quite bad) POVFORK. Delete.
Alex-h (
talk) 21:41, 18 August 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete, This article does not have anything not already covered in the main article. Therefore “Muslim Mojahedin” fails to support
WP:GNG.
Poya-P (
talk) 11:20, 19 August 2022 (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.
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.
Keep: The title is its own distinct term referring to one side of an internal schism within the
PMOI that is currently inadequately examined on that page. It might be considered a child article of
the schism on that page, and, were it currently a part of that page, it would make for a viable split, since Google Scholar yields plenty of
unique scholarly hits for the specific term. The current overlap with the
PMOI article is meanwhile incredibly low: the term "Muslim Mojahedin" is not even referenced there, despite being reliably attested in academic sources. So, there is little obvious duplication, no clear reason for deletion and good reason to retain the article as a viable child article. Were there space on
PMOI to merge the content back in, that could have been an alternative, but, as it is, the page is already over-length, and that is not the topic here.
Iskandar323 (
talk) 12:25, 12 August 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete per
WP:POVFORK. "Muslim Mojahedin" is only a term, in this instance used to differentiate
People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran from
another group (which is something that's already analyzed in both of those articles). I don't see anything new or notable enough to move to the other articles, and a redirect isn’t a good idea because the term is also used as reference for many other groups. This is a (quite bad) POVFORK. Delete.
Alex-h (
talk) 21:41, 18 August 2022 (UTC)reply
Delete, This article does not have anything not already covered in the main article. Therefore “Muslim Mojahedin” fails to support
WP:GNG.
Poya-P (
talk) 11:20, 19 August 2022 (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.