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. Eluchil404 (talk) 01:30, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

English translations of the Quran[edit]

English translations of the Quran (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

WP:NOT a list, there's already List_of_translations_of_the_Quran and this doesn't add anything other than advertising (and probably never will) MrHarambe (talk) 15:39, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Maybe the reason it was created is because List_of_translations_of_the_Quran became too long? -- See Bible translations into English and Jewish_English_Bible_translations (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 15:47, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:00, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:00, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Not favoring deletion. English translations of Quran are many and varied, so a separate article discussing all nuances involved is appropriate. Perhaps the english section of the List article can be shortened to include only salient representatives of the different sorts of translations of this difficult text.Ernobe (talk) 01:30, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep This is exactly what's modeled at Wikipedia:Stand-alone lists and This is the parent for a rather well-defined structure at Category:English translations of the Quran, which exists separate and apart form any other article about translations. The sources here are above and beyond minimums needed. I'm not sure what "advertising" exists here, but if there is any the solution is editing, not deletion. Alansohn (talk) 18:24, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. This can be an exhaustive list of English translations, with the general list of translations listing only major ones, or all, or otherwise. --Ouro (blah blah) 12:02, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Don't favour aiming for an exhaustive list (WP:NOT), but there is material for an article based on the eight translations already with a WP article, and on sources commenting on these and others: Noyster (talk), 12:58, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • True, You are. I agree. Maybe the exhaustive part was too much. --Ouro (blah blah) 13:40, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Seems like quite a reasonable article to have. --doncram 18:35, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - seems to be a useful spinoff of the longer, all-language list. Smmurphy^(Talk) 20:27, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as per nomination.CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 21:09, 20 February 2017 (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.