Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Recommended precaution (2nd nomination)

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 of the debate was Keep, albeit with something approaching consensus for a merge. I'll close this debate as "keep" but the result should not be taken to mean that a merger cannot be performed. If a better article results from a merger be bold and merge. kingboyk 09:45, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, not encyclopedic on its own. Posssibly merged with something. It should be noted that this was up for deletion in July 2005 with only 3 votes resulting in a no concensus (See here for previous AFD) Jersey Devil 06:04, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment User Jersey Devil appears to be on the war path against User Striver by proposing all articles created by the latter for deletion. Sad. Lambiam 16:56, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Probably agree with nom, but what is the actual arabic term for "recommended precaution"? It should have been added to the article in the beginning. Additionally, if this stub were to be merged (per WP:WINAD it cannot exist as it is), where should it go? Esquizombi 06:11, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and expand No reason why this can't be an article. It's a notable feature of daily life for millions of people. Bobby P. Smith Sr. Jr. 12:50, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep search this for "precaution". Then also see bottom half of Wikipedia:WikiProject Islam:The Muslim Guild/Articles for deletion --Striver 15:45, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Jersey Devil stop trying to make a Point -Irishpunktom\^talk 16:11, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Move to whatever the Arabic / Persian term is... these English translations of Striver's aren't very good... like List of notable Muslim reports... it should be List of hadith.... having an article implies notability so notable is redundant and any scholar calls them hadith not reports... rampant English translation of terms mostly used in their original language is bad. gren グレン 18:41, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Or you can just improve the translation -- I already changed "Muslim callers" to "Caller to Islam"... AnonMoos 12:47, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• keep nothing wrong with this article. Niffweed17, Destroyer of Chickens 21:06, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and move to the Arabic term. I've heard of the concept before, yet the Arabic term escapes me at the moment. Pepsidrinka`
• Strong keep Term is, I think, Ihtiyat Mustahab Dlyons493 Talk 22:35, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep or merge. It should be under the Arabic term, as that will be the one used in discussions of fiqh and sharia. I'm still not sure that this deserves a whole article, however -- it could easily be merged into Fiqh. IMHO, breakout articles are necessary when a topic gets too big or contentious in a main article. Creating them just to hold one para is a pointless waste of Wiki resources. Zora 00:08, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair point - merge is fine with me too. Dlyons493 Talk 00:35, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikisource is wasted by being forced to spew out a list of 1000 arabic words, instead of a simple article for the word you wanted. --Striver 02:04, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect and merge (or delete and merge) to Mustahabb. Thereafter, I think Fard, Mustahabb, Mubah, Makruh, Haraam and any other related terms should be merged with redirects into Fiqh or else collected in a single subarticle of Fiqh covering these, perhaps "al-ahkam al-khamsa" or whatever title would be appropriate. Esquizombi 03:43, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge per Gren. --AladdinSE 00:49, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Recommended precaution" is NOT the same as "Mustahabb", its "Ihtiyat Mustahabb". Its NOT "Recommended" + "precaution", its a term used by Shi'a marja when they are not sure of what they should say, its complemeted by "obligatory precation" as i have explained in the talk page. --Striver 00:54, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• • Comment I do believe I understand what you're saying, but the distinction can still be made between the two in the Mustahabb article, and as I indicated above, I believe all the fiqh terms should be merged. Esquizombi 03:20, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep It should have better title though. Zain 01:55, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge to Fiqh--Isotope23 21:04, 20 March 2006 (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.