![]() | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | It is requested that a photograph be
included in this article to
improve its quality.
Wikipedians in Iraq may be able to help! The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
User @
HistoryofIran: has been referring the Muslim army of the Rashidun Caliphate as “Arabs” and reverting edits changing the term to “Muslim”. Looking at this user’s edit history, he seems to impose Islamophobic and anti-Arab antagonistic language. This user has used the justification of “some scholars referred to early ‘Muslim army’ as ‘Arab army’”, which is weak reasoning to enforce a mandate of the word ‘Arab’. The Muslim military had many non-Arabs, including Muslim Persians. (Most famously
Salman the Persian,
Salim Mawla ibn Abu Hudhayfa,
Munabbih ibn Kamil, and
Fayruz al-Daylami.) This is not an “opinion” as HistoryofIran has alleged. The word ‘Muslims’ to refer to the multiethnic Muslims army is both more accurate, less racially-charged and better written than the current:
When Ctesiphon fell to the Arabs in 637, the carpet was too heavy for the Iranians to carry away, and which resulted in the carpet being seized by the Arabs. Sa'd ibn Abi Waqqas, who led the Arab troops during the capture of Ctesiphon, sent the carpet to the Rashidun caliph Umar, who was in Medina. There the carpet was cut into small fragments and divided among the Arabs. One of the Arabs who received a piece of the carpet was Ali who, although he did not receive the best piece, managed to sell it for 30,000 dirhams.
It seems HistoryofIran is edit warring for the sole purpose of pushing racist and islamophobic language. There is no benefit to using the word ‘Arab’ instead of ‘Muslim’. —
LissanX (
talk)
04:09, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | It is requested that a photograph be
included in this article to
improve its quality.
Wikipedians in Iraq may be able to help! The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
User @
HistoryofIran: has been referring the Muslim army of the Rashidun Caliphate as “Arabs” and reverting edits changing the term to “Muslim”. Looking at this user’s edit history, he seems to impose Islamophobic and anti-Arab antagonistic language. This user has used the justification of “some scholars referred to early ‘Muslim army’ as ‘Arab army’”, which is weak reasoning to enforce a mandate of the word ‘Arab’. The Muslim military had many non-Arabs, including Muslim Persians. (Most famously
Salman the Persian,
Salim Mawla ibn Abu Hudhayfa,
Munabbih ibn Kamil, and
Fayruz al-Daylami.) This is not an “opinion” as HistoryofIran has alleged. The word ‘Muslims’ to refer to the multiethnic Muslims army is both more accurate, less racially-charged and better written than the current:
When Ctesiphon fell to the Arabs in 637, the carpet was too heavy for the Iranians to carry away, and which resulted in the carpet being seized by the Arabs. Sa'd ibn Abi Waqqas, who led the Arab troops during the capture of Ctesiphon, sent the carpet to the Rashidun caliph Umar, who was in Medina. There the carpet was cut into small fragments and divided among the Arabs. One of the Arabs who received a piece of the carpet was Ali who, although he did not receive the best piece, managed to sell it for 30,000 dirhams.
It seems HistoryofIran is edit warring for the sole purpose of pushing racist and islamophobic language. There is no benefit to using the word ‘Arab’ instead of ‘Muslim’. —
LissanX (
talk)
04:09, 8 September 2020 (UTC)