Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Raaz-e-Hayat

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 redirect to Wahiduddin Khan. This has remained open for quite a long time and hasn't received any comment since last 24 days. I'm independently closing it as a redirect to the article about its author Wahiduddin Khan because the references used aren't legit sources and I do not think there's something worth discussion. (non-admin closure) ─ The Aafī ^{^(talk)} 16:42, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Raaz-e-Hayat

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Using the google translation of references 2-4, they are all excerpts or possibly blurbs for the book, not substantial coverage. DGG ( talk ) 19:58, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:22, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:22, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment A book published in the 1980s which was reprinted twice is the sort of book that I expect to find pre-digital coverage for. To go into multiple editions requires more success than most books have. Non-English newspapers are much less thoroughly digitized and catalogued than, e.g., the main American papers of record. I suspect this book got several reviews in Urdu newspapers in the 1980s. Whether anybody can now find those reviews is perhaps unlikely, unless the newer editions of the book includes quotes from them which could be used to go find the original source. For me, I think the question is whether the accessible sourcing is sufficient to write an appropriate article. If not, best to merge this content into Wahiduddin Khan. ~ L 🌸 (talk) 22:17, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Wahiduddin Khan. Agree with the sentiments given above. I can speak some Urdu, I can't read it. --Whiteguru (talk) 07:11, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have added two more sources (Ref: 2 & 3) to the article that present reviews of the book.Insight 3 (talk) 09:45, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for doing some sleuthing! Of those, #3 looks like it is actually providing the book itself (at least, using google translate on their "about" page makes it sound like they are a book repository rather than a reviewing publication. So I'm not sure it's "independent." #2 looks like it might be the blog of the writer Mumtaz Mufti? So it's independent, but not sure it's "reliable". ~ L 🌸 (talk) 04:05, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your interest. Yes, the Ref.3 is primarily a book repository, but I believe, like many such sites, they include reviews from independent sources. For the Ref.2, I would say mumtazmufti is founded by Ux Mufti who himself is a literary critic and the son of famous Urdu writer Mumtaz Mufti, so his site should be considered as reliable.Insight 3 (talk) 04:29, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 22:50, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep with an "additional citations needed" maintenance tag.Insight 3 (talk) 04:29, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 🌀Locomotive207-talk🌀 03:15, 19 December 2021 (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.