Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Islam

Shortcuts

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Islam. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Islam|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Islam. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Islam/archive

Purge page cache

watch

Islam

Kazasker Mosque, Kadıköy

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Current article sourced only to UGC. I have not been able to find any other sources in Turkish about this building (though I have turned up sources on mosques with the same name in other cities). Does not appear to be notable. Mccapra (talk) 19:15, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture, Islam, and Turkey. Mccapra (talk) 19:15, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Zafarul Islam Islahi

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non notable scholar and educator, fails WP:GNG in general, doesn’t meet WP:NPROF, the article isn’t written in a clear and Neutral point of view per WP:NPOV. Chippla ✍️ - Best Regards 12:58, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and India. Chippla ✍️ - Best Regards 12:58, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Islam and Uttar Pradesh. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:10, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - It's an unsourced BLP. The bibliography is by him, not about him. Bearian (talk) 09:40, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: While there is one source from The Milli Gazette, but the subject fails WP:GNG, WP:NBIO and WP:NPROF. Taabii (talk) 10:57, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Atta ul Haq Darvish

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No reason given. Technical nomination only. AfD created improperly by Mister Bahattar (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log). Please note that the subject appears to be a mmber of the Senate of Pakistan, which normally indicates notability. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 08:47, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. 08:47, 24 July 2025 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. 08:47, 24 July 2025 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:45, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep. The subject of the article is a member of the upper house of a national legislature. Easily satisfies WP:NPOL. Lefcentreright Discuss 13:44, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of senators of Pakistan per WP:BIOSPECIAL, as the subject currently does not meet WP:NBASIC but meets one of more of the additional criteria. If WP:SIGCOV is found, ping me. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:07, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Because the subject WP:NPOL as a member of the Senate of Pakistan, there is a presumption of notability. So the real question, rather than arguing notability, is whether he surpasses WP:NOPAGE for a standalone article. I would note he was just elected a few days ago. Thus, I think we can presume (there are multiple levels of presumption) that he will receive coverage as is typical of high officeholders, so it is safe to wait a bit; if this coverage does not come, then we can defer to NOPAGE. Coverage also likely to be in Urdu, which as a non-Latin script language is typically harder to search. Curbon7 (talk) 21:58, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My reason is here -> Didn't meet GNG and WP:NBASIC Mister Bahattar (talk) 08:58, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - presumed notable, or redirect temporarily as suggested. Bearian (talk) 09:50, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep meets NPOL Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 20:36, 29 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

New Crescent Society

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This should never have been accepted. The history is full of editors who declined this because of its language (AI-created); I can't judge that, but I do know that we have a bunch of poorly verified factoids about a non-notable organizations, with a bunch of sources that don't even mention the subject but are synthesized into the article. Drmies (talk) 14:23, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Islam, Astronomy, and United Kingdom. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:53, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep (disclosure: I approved the AfC): After reviewing most of the sources, I found that the organization does have significant secondary coverage, and I did not find any hallucinated references. As much as I dislike LLM-generated articles, this one at least appears to have undergone enough human cleanup to be a reliable article based on real sources (I did not look at earlier versions). ~~I did not encounter any sources that don't mention the subject, but I could have missed some as I did not verify every last reference.~~ It could use some work, and the article is longer than many of the cited sources, but it clears WP:GNG. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 23:03, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- WeirdNAnnoyed, which decent, reliable, secondary sources mention the subject in any significant way?? The Al Jazeera article doesn't even mention the group! Drmies (talk) 14:03, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  The articles in Religion Media Centre (Ref. 10) and The New Arab (Ref. 17) are both substantially about the organization and appear to be reliable. I partly retract my last statement, as many of the references in fact do not mention the organization but are about moon-sighting in general. I do think a lot of the text and references in the article could be cut. But two independent sources is generally enough to clear WP:NORG if I'm not mistaken. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 00:13, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Both the Religion Media Centre and The New Arab articles are secondary sources which heavily write about the article which is all that is needed acording to the guidelines. The other articles provide some background into the topic of moonsighting and the organisation as a whole. They have now also undergone a clean up, there was no need to flag this for deletion. TruthKnowledgeSeeker2025 (talk) 03:02, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I do appreciate your concerns about the language used and this will be addressed in future edits however all text used in the article is accurate, reliable and impartial mostly based on the secondary sources. TruthKnowledgeSeeker2025 (talk) 03:11, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A reason you mentioned; the history being full of editors who rejected it for it's language was before the article underwent a massive human cleanup and rewritten. TruthKnowledgeSeeker2025 (talk) 03:20, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Further secondary sources alongside the two mentioned above now include Muslim Heritage and another article from the religon media centre written by a different author. There are also other sources such as from the Royal Museums Greenwich's website which speak about the planetary and astronomy shows and the annual Ramadan moonsigthing events hosted by the royal Observatory Greenwich. The Mayor Of London/London Gov website in the events section also mention these planetary shows alongside a seprate mention of the society being directly involved in the planning and preparation of various events inclduing the light up show of the London Eye something which has been written in the article and referenced with this. TruthKnowledgeSeeker2025 (talk) 00:49, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 14:52, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tehreek-e-Nizam-e-Mustafa

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Searches did not turn up enough in-depth coverage from independent, reliable sources to support meeting WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:15, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Islam, and Pakistan. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:17, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and Move as it was a notable movement to implement Islamic law in specifically Azad Kashmir region (not in Pakistan). So move it to Tehreek-e-Nizam-e-Mustafa Azad Kashmir. Behappyyar (talk) 15:31, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 19:27, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 21:09, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Miscellaneous

Proposed deletions

Templates

Islam

Kazasker Mosque, Kadıköy

Zafarul Islam Islahi

Atta ul Haq Darvish

New Crescent Society

Tehreek-e-Nizam-e-Mustafa

Miscellaneous

Proposed deletions

Categories

Templates