Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Muhammad Muhsin Khan

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. Mailer Diablo 08:16, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Muhammad Muhsin Khan

Delete. The subject is a translator. That is considerably less than an author. The article asserts no other notability.- CrazyRussian talk/email 02:24, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per lack of assertion of notability as nominator mentions above hoopydink^{Conas tá tú?} 02:55, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Translators are alot more notable then you think, and require almost as much work as writing somthing in the first place. This particular translator is notable due to his 18,900 Google hits, his books' listing on Amazon, and his position at the Islamic University of Madinah. tmopkisn ^tlka 02:58, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

• Comment, only 595 unique Ghits for the man, and that's what ultimately counts when referring to Google. -- H·G (^words/_works) 05:14, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

• only? 595 unique hits is quite good you can never get more than 700 or so on any search. You might want to reread WP:GT. -MrFizyx 17:46, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete, he translated a Sunni Hadith collection and the Qur'an. The author of this page authored the pages on both of those works, the best Amazon.com ranking of which is 251,000. Frankly, I'm not sure if notability is established here--I didn't see anything on his position at a University in the article or any of the links, and the External Link at the bottom is dead; and even that wouldn't necessarily establish notability per WP:BIO or WP:PROF. -- H·G (^words/_works) 05:22, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment. I'd just like to suggest that if this is deleted (which seems to be an increasing possibility) then the articles of his two books should probably be nominated as well. tmopkisn ^tlka 06:03, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
    • Not at all. If a man makes a notable translation of the Qur'an, the book itself may stay even as the translator goes. No necessity here whatsoever. - CrazyRussian talk/email 10:50, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
      • I never said that it was a necessity, just a suggestion. tmopkisn ^tlka 22:11, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
• Weak keep although calling a 1000 page book a Summarized Sahih Al-Bukhari seems somewhat of a misnomer, it does suggest the work is non-trivial. Dlyons493 Talk 12:59, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep and cleanup. Translating the version of the Qur'an that's distributed to pilgrims by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia on the Hajj strikes me as a notable accomplishment. Smerdis of Tlön 14:27, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
• Weak Keep but needs expansion and cleanup. A translator (or editor) can be notable. Scorpiondollprincess 16:19, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
• Weak keep per above. Would be nice if the bio could be expaned to assert notability. I'm hitting a dead end with the exerternally linked bio. -MrFizyx 17:51, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. per Smerdis of Tlön. --Wine Guy Talk 22:47, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep and add to a subcat or two of Category:Translators. Being a translator is not in itself an assertion of notability, but this chap seems significant anyway (see the Amazon bio). There are also some accusations of inaccuracy ([1]) which could be added if a reliable source is located. Considering the large numbers of people at Category:Bible translators, it seems unnecessary to remove this Islamic equivalent. Ziggurat 01:54, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
• keep please this translator is notable and important Yuckfoo 20:43, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

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.