User talk:DGG/Arabic-Persian literacy relation

Next steps after AFD discussion

@Nannadeem: @HyperGaruda: @FreeatlastChitchat: @Sa.vakilian: @SwisterTwister: @DGG: it seems there's been a miscommunication with the closure. See this comment by the closing admin. I believe the consensus was to draftify and attempt merging the content, unless someone can come up with RSs on the subject of "literacy relation". So, the next step would be WP:USERFY. Does that make sense? Eperoton (talk) 14:27, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

I think the article should be merged in Persian language#New Persian or Persian literature#Persian literature of the medieval and pre-modern_periods. You can add the suitable content with reliable source to those articles.--Seyyed(t-c) 18:48, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Rational and Request: Is this rational to have analysis by the page deletion voter(s)? Logically it is the subject of page merging proposers. I further add (having been compelled) that both deletion voters participated in the Wikipedia Asian Month(November-2015) one contributed one article and other has none at his credit. But one may see their editing during this period in other fields, thus I do not expect constructive approach from them, therefore would request for 3rd party analysis, if an analysis is a must. Thanks Nannadeem (talk) 15:06, 10 February 2016 (UTC) 15:04, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

I have no problem leaving the merging analysis to other editors, though of course I may rejoin the effort if I disagree with resulting additions to pages on my watchlist. Eperoton (talk) 16:32, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Analysis of potential mergers

@Nannadeem, HyperGaruda, FreeatlastChitchat, Sa.vakilian, Eperoton, and DGG: I have taken a look at each section separately and concluded that there might be a small amount of mergable content, but most of the article is already covered elsewhere. See below for a breakdown of what might be mergable. - HyperGaruda (talk) 10:25, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

First Arabic Dictionary

No need to merge, Kitab al-'Ayn is already a comprehensive article on its own. - HyperGaruda (talk) 10:25, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Literacy background

Subject is mostly covered in Hadith#History, but I am also concerned about the reliability of al-Najashi (11th century CE), al-Suyuti (15th century CE) and Mustafa Awliya'i as sources. The first two are rather old, while there are enough modern scholarly sources that can be used instead. About Mustafa Awliya'i: who is this? Where does he come from? What scholarly background does he have? I can't find anything about him on Google. Is Awliya'i a real Persian surname in the first place? - HyperGaruda (talk) 10:25, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Literacy development

Looks more like a WP:COATRACK about dewan and the rise of the Islamic Golden Age, so here are two potential merger destinations, although I doubt that Islamic Golden Age has any gaps that could be filled with this article. - HyperGaruda (talk) 10:25, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Philosophy in Arabic

This section basically says: "Here are a couple of Persian scholars that wrote in Arabic about philosophy." Nothing that is not already covered more reliably and in-depth in Islamic philosophy. - HyperGaruda (talk) 10:25, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Historiography

Historiography of early Islam seems to have everything covered already. - HyperGaruda (talk) 10:25, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

New Persian

You can make a separate article for New Persian and then and this issue as a sub-section.--Seyyed(t-c) 10:33, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

@Seyyed: Can I know who is this YOU (you can make a separate...)? Nannadeem (talk) 10:52, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Good question! I had not thought about it ;-)--Seyyed(t-c) 08:44, 15 February 2016 (UTC)