Contents

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SunniPath (2nd nomination)

SunniPath[edit]

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

SunniPath (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

None of the links work. Perhaps it no longer exists. No real evidence of notability. Rathfelder (talk) 16:18, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. Rathfelder (talk) 16:18, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The link may or may not work but is/was indeed popular source of Islamic knowledge run by notable teachers. If it is found that it does not exist, article may be edited. ScholarM (talk) 16:32, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ScholarM, I see this says that Muhammad ibn Adam al-Kawthari was also associated with that. ─ The Aafī ^(talk) 03:30, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Totally unreferenced article. Doesn't seem like notability can even be established. Mansheimer (talk) 17:25, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The primary link was to a parked GoDaddy domain. The other one is a fake link (not only dead as a link, but the site may never have existed). This appears to be a spam article and should be marked for speedy deletion. Mansheimer (talk) 17:29, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. Based on the latest archived copy (https://web.archive.org/web/20180722110602/https://qibla.com/) it can be concluded that they have stopped operations in 2017 and the site is down since 2018. However, they were mentioned in 2 books at least:
  • https://books.google.com.co/books?id=KXNGAAAAQBAJ
  • https://books.google.com.co/books?id=0FP1AgAAQBAJ

Dr.KBAHT (talk) 17:40, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:32, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:32, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete the single ref added by The Aafi is the briefest of passing mentions. This looks like fairly substantial coverage but this just looks like a printed directory of links to fatwas collected on the site rather than any in depth discussion of the site itself. It certainly existed but there are any number of such sites and nothing tells me this one was particularly authoritative, widely cited or discussed in depth on a sustained basis. Mccapra (talk) 18:19, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep but rewrite looking notable site to me after seeing various available sources on internet, but it needs to be rewritten on the current status of the website. Although this site is not functioning but just looked at its status on godaddy which is "Parked free" which means the owner of the domain had parked it for the future use, there are chances of it being functional. Youbat (talk) 09:53, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep passes WP:SIGCOV from the sources presented here and in the article. It does need copyediting and updating, but AFD is not cleanup.4meter4 (talk) 16:58, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete does not meet WP:GNG. There is not a significant coverage. The Washington Post is a passing mention. Peter303x (talk) 08:06, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete no significant coverage. DGG ( talk ) 07:15, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, lacks significant coverage. MrsSnoozyTurtle 08:42, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• I think there is now just about enough evidence that the organisation is notable. Rathfelder (talk) 21:43, 24 June 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.