Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bab (gateway)

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 delete. Steve Smith (talk) 14:55, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bab (gateway)

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

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

As mentioned on the talk page there earlier, this topic is simply the Arabic word for gate or door, and any content that would belong here would be better placed on those main pages. I don't see any argument for it meeting the notability requirement on Wikipedia (see also WP:NOT#DICTIONARY). Having a separate encyclopedia entry for it here implies that there is some essential difference between gates/doors in the Arabic/Persian/Turkish-speaking world and those in the rest of the world, which is not reasonably the case and unnecessarily creates a content fork. For comparison, even specialized encyclopedias like The Grove encyclopedia of Islamic art and architecture and Brill's Encyclopaedia of Islam do not have separate entries for "bab" or "gate". In short: any differences in the form or function of gates across different regions can be covered either at the gate page or other relevant architecture topics like Islamic architecture. There is already an appropriate page on Wiktionary for the word "bab" itself. The current article mentions the word's function in Shi'a Islam, but this already has its own relevant pages such as Bab (Shia Islam).

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 01:11, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2020 December 18. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:19, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, clearly neither an encyclopedic article or legit disambiguation page. Geschichte (talk) 19:43, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, wholly uncited for years. Nom's rationale is spot on. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 23:37, 1 January 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.