The following information passed a request for deletion.
This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive.
this doesn't look particularly idiomatic to me. -- Liliana • 04:50, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- It does to me, though, like New World, Old World. It's not exactly a "world". It's a cultural area. We don't have "English World" or "French World" - countries where English or French is spoken. Admittedely it's controversial, since non-Arabs living in these countries dislike it or don't want to belong there. Keep --Anatoli 05:10, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- If a term is used widely in newspapers we should define it, that way people unfamiliar with it could find out exactly what it means. If not someone could think it means a world wide caliphate, a theme park, or something other than the middle east, which is in fact not all arab, so we should keep it.Acdcrocks 09:43, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- I think Arab and world should cover this. If they don't, it's because our definitions are not good enough. --Mglovesfun (talk) 10:15, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- What’s the difference between the criteria of western world and Arab World? — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 14:48, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
- I don't know whether we should keep Arab World--I'm tending to no--but the western world is not the world west of something, or in the western hemisphere.--Prosfilaes 21:28, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
It's totally idiomatic. Read any Anglophone news source and it's bound to come up eventually. "Large cultural area" isn't one of the definitions under world either. Keep. Saimdusan (talk) 23:03, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
- Kept. — Ungoliant (Falai) 19:36, 12 August 2012 (UTC)