Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sitt al-'Ajam

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. (non-admin closure) Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 06:48, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sitt al-'Ajam (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)

It's very hard to assess the sources as the majority are offline, but if indeed "her main merit was writing a commentary on ibn Arabi's Mashahid" as the article states, then I would argue she is unlikely to be notable, and does not appear to meet WP:GNG or academic/writer guidelines. Hugsyrup (talk) 12:59, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Hugsyrup (talk) 12:59, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Hugsyrup (talk) 12:59, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. Hugsyrup (talk) 12:59, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Google tosses up a few more sources that mention the subject, albeit in passing. Nevertheless, virtually any 13th century author whose works have survived to the present and continue to be discussed would seem to be notable to my view. --RaiderAspect (talk) 13:33, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Per the coverage in the sources already in the article and RaiderAspect's argument. (In practice any known medieval writer whose writings have survived is sure to have been covered in some depth my multiple sources.) הסרפד (call me Hasirpad) 15:17, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment WP:PROF and WP:AUTHOR just don't seem particularly relevant for 13th-century figures; in practice, their domain of application is the living and sometimes the recently deceased. And writing commentaries is what a lot of medieval notables are best known for. XOR'easter (talk) 16:45, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. XOR'easter (talk) 16:45, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong Keep. The subject of this article parallels many other articles we have on historic rabbis and Christian scholars. The sourcing is sound and I can’t see any case for deletion at all. Mccapra (talk) 17:01, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment there’s a paper on academia.edu on the topic of her work here and her main book still seems to be in print. Mccapra (talk) 17:19, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep there appear to be an extraordinary number of sources for a 13th century figure. The nominator dismisses the intellectual weight of commentary, especially within a tradition such as Sufism, at their own peril. Horse Eye Jack (talk) 22:37, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. If her reputation has lasted so long she is notable. Xxanthippe (talk) 06:37, 26 May 2019 (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.