Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Muslim reports

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. Kurykh (talk) 00:59, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

List of Muslim reports

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

Mostly because the choice of subsections and authenticity evaluation constitutes original research. I also find the authenticity statements to be less accurate when a hadith article refers to multiple narrations, with each narration most likely having its own evaluation (e.g., Hadith of the two weighty things mentions no less than 10 narrations).

There is also some needless repetition, which is a good indicator that a list format may not be suitable. As an alternative to this article, I think we should have a category for the "Hadith of" articles. This should help with the navigation. Another option is to reduce this article to a list of links and delete any hadith article that fails notability. Wiqi⁽⁵⁵⁾ 09:13, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:56, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:56, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

Delete. For me, the only reason to keep navigational lists over categories is that list entries can be sorted and annotated according to specific needs. Considering the sheer amount of alternative views on each report, such sorting/annotating would become unmanagable and is likely going to include a lot of WP:OR/WP:SYNTH. A simple category already exists at Category:Hadith. --HyperGaruda (talk) 20:35, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Rename This looks fine to me, but shouldn't it be called "List of Muslim Hadiths"? None of the individual articles are called 'Reports.' Supervoter (talk) 04:41, 23 February 2017 (UTC)(Note: since this user is The SUPERVOTER, his votes are worth 10 REGULAR VOTES in all Wiki discussions. Thanks for your understanding. Please see my userpage if you have questions.)[reply]

Note: This user's actions are being discussed here. J 947 05:36, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete since the category is not substantially different from this list. I agree that there is a large amount of WP:OR here. Laurdecl ^talk 04:44, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete - I think List of hadith authors and commentators and Template:Islamic texts category tree are more useful ways to organize articles about hadith and the choices made in this article seem too OR. I imagine that a list like this could exist if better sourced as a list to avoid OR, and the OR issue is my main reason to !vote delete. Smmurphy^(Talk) 17:25, 26 February 2017 (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.