Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hadiths related to Mut'ah

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. --04:49, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Hadiths related to Mut'ah

VFD was not properly formatted, fixing that; no vote on my part. --Metropolitan90 04:43, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia should not be a repository for hadith dumps. If the "evidence" doesn't fit in the main article, then it should either be in Wikisource (?) or relegated to external links. As it stands, this article is completely incomprehensible to anyone who doesn't already know what nikah mut'ah is and why it is controversial. If that is added, then the article is just a repetition of the nikah mut'ah article. Zora 21:39, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

• Keep This article is not about explaining what Nikah Mut'ah is about, rather it's to represent the arguments used to validated its abrogation or the lack of using hadithes as sources. But how could you know it, you didn't even bother to read it. --Striver 00:23, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
• keep. The article contains useful information that can help better understand the characteristics of Islamic denominations.--Zereshk 03:39, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Internal links give context and background, as is usual with Wikipedia. Thousands of articles here would be difficult to follow out of context — but they have the context of thousands of other Wikipedia articles. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 08:49, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect to Mut'ah (marriage), where it needs to be cut down and put into context. WP is not the place for extended interpretation of holy books; any such interpretations need to be closely tied to specific, encyclopedic issues. Dcarrano 15:15, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

coment The article does not interpret the hadith, it represent how diffrent famous scholars imterpreted them. A major difrence, and worth representation. furthermore, Mut'ah (marriage) presents the concept, not shows how the scholars interpret wheather it is allowed or not. The concept is one thing, the cholars view of wheather it is allowed or not is a tottaly diffrent matter.

• • You're right, I misspoke. Rather, WP is not the place for extended discussion of interpretations of holy books, unless it's tied to a specific encyclopedic issue. When you're discussing a religious concept, that's where the compare and contrast of interpretations should come out -- in the article about that concept. Dcarrano 15:51, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

• • • commentwell as you said it your self "unless it's tied to a specific encyclopedic issue". In this case it tied to Nikah Mut'ah. Howeverm, i do not agree that the "contrast of interpretations " should come into the article in this case, since ther is no contrast of interpretation regarding what it is and how it was reaveled. The contrast is about how and when it got abrogated. And that is a whole other issue than describing what it is. For example, a Jew might decide to enter a nikah, in that case s/he does not want or need to know about "contrast of interpretations " regarding if its abrogated or not, s/he only wants/needs to know what it is.

--Striver 16:03, 20 July 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.