Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sultana Mahdokht

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. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 03:14, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sultana Mahdokht

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

Obvious plagiarism - seems to have been copied near exactly from [1] - possible move to WikiSource? Flamthonas FIrearrow (talk) 15:59, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:26, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:26, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom - Clearly copied off [2] & reworded here & there, I appreciate the creator had reworded it somewhat but unfortunately it's not good enough here. IMHO I don't think anyone will transfer to WikiSource (I've never used the site in my life so wouldn't know the first thing about transferring there!), –Davey2010 • (talk) 21:28, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I'm not overly convinced this should be kept nor do I agree with Plagiarism but at the end of the day we're an encyclopedia and we should have articles on stuff like this, So I'll have to say Keep. –Davey2010 ^{Merry Xmas / Happy New Year} 02:36, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Prune and keep -- I accept that we cannot keep plagiarism. However, if she is a saint revered by the Assyrian Church, we ought to have an article on her. I would thus suggest cutting this donw to just the lead and adding an external link to the plagiarised source, by way of reference. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:36, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Plagiarism has been removed. ^BE _CK ^Y _SA ^{Y L}E _S 01:58, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Agree that we should retain articles on saints recognised by legitimate churches. -- Necrothesp (talk) 00:11, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:04, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. With plagiarized portion removed, article has no sound basis for deletion. ^BE _CK ^Y _SA ^{Y L}E _S 01:58, 5 January 2015 (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.