This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Censorship in Islamic societies article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
This article was nominated for deletion on 10 September 2012. The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
Clearly a start-up page. Will work on it more later. One important subject is the history of censorship in Islam. Casprings ( talk) 05:50, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
I made a few changes and commented [1]. Please do not revert. Give me a few days to research and source this a little. Frankly, I found it wrong that article was proposed for deletion without any discussion here. I will return to editing later. Thanks. My very best wishes ( talk) 06:00, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
Here is the list of websites that Islamic states allegedly censor:
Year | Country | Websites | Additional information |
---|---|---|---|
2011 | Saudi Arabia | Faith Freedom International, WikiIslam, Answering Islam, The Religion Of Peace, MuhammadTube & Jihad Watch. | All are blocked on the country's pornography blacklist |
Iran | Jihad Watch, Faith Freedom International & Answering Islam | ||
United Arab Emirates | Answering Islam, Faith Freedom International, JihadWatch, MuhammadTube, TheReligionofPeace & WikiIslam | ||
Pakistan | Jihad Watch, MuhammadTube & TheReligionofPeace. | ||
2009 | Saudi Arabia | Faith Freedom International, WikiIslam, & Answering Islam | All are blocked on the country's pornography blacklist |
Iran | Faith Freedom International | ||
United Arab Emirates | Faith Freedom International | ||
Pakistan | WikiIslam & Answering Islam | ||
2008 | Saudi Arabia | Faith Freedom International | |
Iran | Faith Freedom International | ||
2007 | Saudi Arabia | Faith Freedom International | |
Iran | Faith Freedom International | ||
Pakistan | Faith Freedom International | ||
Kuwait | Faith Freedom International | Some ISP level blocks | |
Indonesia | Faith Freedom International | Some ISP level blocks | |
2006 | Saudi Arabia | Faith Freedom International | |
Iran | Faith Freedom International | ||
Pakistan | Faith Freedom International |
While this restriction certainly won't stop editors from adding non-censorship, news incidents, and stuff that belongs in country articles if they really want to, I'd like to suggest that editors try to use scholarly sources when writing the article, rather than synthesizing news sources. – Roscelese ( talk ⋅ contribs) 18:06, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
Or this:
Clearly government action. GregJackP Boomer!
We request that editors comment on the following issues: 1) does this article require the use of solely academic sources; 2) does the article require explicit use of the word censorship in the source; and 3) is a restricted definition of censorship to be used, i.e. only by governmental agencies, or is the definition used in the Wikipedia article correct, where censorship may be by the government, media, private groups, or individuals?
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The use of solely academic sources is not required.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
An article does not need to explicitly use the word "censorship" in order to be useful as a source, so long as the meaning is clear from the context of the article.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The definition already in place in the
Censorship article should be used. That definition states: "Censorship is the suppression of speech or other public communication which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or inconvenient as determined by a government, media outlet, or other controlling body. It can be done by governments and private organizations or by individuals who engage in self-censorship."
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Revised definition per conversation above: "Censorship is the suppression of speech or other public communication which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or inconvenient as determined by a government, media outlet, or other controlling body. It can be done by governments and private organizations acting at the behest or with the approval of government.
This article is not List of times Muslims assassinated or attacked people, and also every way in which religion forms part of the state apparatus, and also the times when political censorship took place in a Muslim-majority society. Y'all are claiming that there's a topic here, but your editing isn't bearing that out - if "Islamic censorship" is a thing, then why has nearly all the material added to this article not been about that thing? – Roscelese ( talk ⋅ contribs) 15:33, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
I disagree, but I'm not going to revert. Since you won't let the RFC or AFD play out, I've requested that an admin revert your last deletion and protect the page until we can come to some form of consensus. GregJackP Boomer! 02:39, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
Please identify exactly which references do not meet Wikipedia standards, either by templating the reference or identifying the exact reference on the talk page.
In addition, please identify specific parts of the article that you believe are either Coatrack or a POVfork.
Only by identifying the specific problems can we work on correcting them, or in the event of a disagreement, work at determining what the consensus of the community is.
If the problems are not identified, I will probably remove the tags. Regards, GregJackP Boomer! 00:38, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
I've decided not to bother with this anymore. I'll just prepare another article in userspace. It's not worth trying to improve one here. GregJackP Boomer! 02:57, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
I hope I'm not covering old ground here and I'll admit I'm an atheist, albeit one with an above average understanding of both the new and old testament. If the article included the tragic history of burning of Christian heretics in Europe up to 1612 then it would not appear an attack on a single religion. JRPG ( talk) 16:45, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
Personally, I think full protection while an AfD is going on is ridiculous. We should be allowed to edit the article to improve it. But, whatever, here's some sources we should use.
This is just a sample of possible sources, but it's a starting point. Silver seren C 04:38, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
The lead is a bit of mess. It really needs to summarize the rest of the article.
Also, there should be something about Background of Islamic Thought on Censorship or something like that with discussions on what exactly (in terms of hadith, et cetera) is cited in support of censorship. Comparisons with Catholic church censorship and other cultures would be fantastic.
In terms of nations, everything could be expanded. There's nothing right now on Morocco, Yemen, Bosnia, and many other majority Islamic countries.
Also, the details about Islamic pressure in Western nations should be opened up as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.47.0.74 ( talk) 09:50, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
This whole section is a bit problematic but I've removed the previously closing section as being particularly unencyclopedic.
That something has been cited isn't encyclopedic. Either the information should be stated outright as a fact with the citation being a citation or it simply shouldn't be mentioned. A murder in a country which is not governed in any way by any Islamic organizations does not appear to me to be even remotely close to the slowly developing consensus of what censorship is on this talk page and thus I believe that it and anything like it warrants removal.-- Talain ( talk) 17:17, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
Previously, the section read:
That is, indeed, flatly factually wrong. Saddam personally was not responsible for those actions (being enacted before he had that sort of administrative control in Iraqi history).
With some back and forth, it now says:
And that is completely correct, as per the source. Admittedly, more information is needed about what censorship existed before the 20th century, what censorship exists there today, and... many more things could be added. At least, this is a start.
That is a change from the disputed:
The above text is perhaps technically correct but also misleading (because of what is left out). The source explicitly states that both religious and socio-political concerns played a role in Iraqi censorship. The description of the government as "secularist" is true, but the text should make clear from the context that a secularist government can impose religious censorship. That is exactly what also occurred under (as already cited in this article here elsewhere) Mubarak's Egypt as part of bargaining deals with political opponents.
Thoughts? (P.S. Did not mean for "Please actually read the source cited" to sound like a personal attack, in retrospect it might and that was not the intent.) 72.47.0.74 ( talk) 08:10, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Censorship in Islamic societies. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 10:44, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Censorship in Islamic societies. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.ibtimes.com/hezbollah-issues-fatwa-against-innocence-muslims-makers-rushdie-blasts-movie-790162Hezbollah{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/americas/united-states/120912/should-innocence-muslims-be-censoredShouldWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:01, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Censorship in Islamic societies. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 21:05, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
The disenfranchised inland Berbers revolutionaries replaced the orthodox Almoravids and enforced an even stricter form of Islam, especially in Andalusia. Almohad medieval state-media promoted forced conversions of the double-tax Dhimmis. Opposition including the newly forcefully converted Jewish Tax-collector that warned of the economic consequences of forced conversions, Almohad believed in their ability to keep creating wealth by eternal Jihad using the seemingly unlimited supply of converts to impose the smaller Islamic tax on a bigger population, opposed to the double-tax on the Dhimmi subjects. Dawn prayer daily headcounts were enforced, muslims and converts who didn't appear in dawn prayer rosters were persecuted on a regular basis. Almohad strict censorship played a major role on the reactionary inquisition that enforced a similar reverse censorship campaign. Almohad1184 ( talk) 00:52, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
Dear Wikipedians: As I rarely edit, am posting this as a suggestion for you to consider.
In this section: /info/en/?search=Censorship_in_Islamic_societies#Egypt
The government has used article 44 of the new Egyptian Constitution as justification for their measures, which states "insult or abuse of all religious messengers and prophets shall be prohibited".[25]
However that reference is to an obsolete Egyptian Constitution from before 2014.
In an unofficial English translation of the 2014 Egyptian Constitution I did not find that language: https://www.sis.gov.eg/Newvr/Dustor-en001.pdf .
Recommend removing or rewriting that sentence and the use of the associated footnote.
Sincerely,
Martin L. Buchanan writer and software developer Laramie, WY, USA — Preceding unsigned comment added by MartinLBuchanan ( talk • contribs) 21:15, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Censorship in Islamic societies article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
This article was nominated for deletion on 10 September 2012. The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
Clearly a start-up page. Will work on it more later. One important subject is the history of censorship in Islam. Casprings ( talk) 05:50, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
I made a few changes and commented [1]. Please do not revert. Give me a few days to research and source this a little. Frankly, I found it wrong that article was proposed for deletion without any discussion here. I will return to editing later. Thanks. My very best wishes ( talk) 06:00, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
Here is the list of websites that Islamic states allegedly censor:
Year | Country | Websites | Additional information |
---|---|---|---|
2011 | Saudi Arabia | Faith Freedom International, WikiIslam, Answering Islam, The Religion Of Peace, MuhammadTube & Jihad Watch. | All are blocked on the country's pornography blacklist |
Iran | Jihad Watch, Faith Freedom International & Answering Islam | ||
United Arab Emirates | Answering Islam, Faith Freedom International, JihadWatch, MuhammadTube, TheReligionofPeace & WikiIslam | ||
Pakistan | Jihad Watch, MuhammadTube & TheReligionofPeace. | ||
2009 | Saudi Arabia | Faith Freedom International, WikiIslam, & Answering Islam | All are blocked on the country's pornography blacklist |
Iran | Faith Freedom International | ||
United Arab Emirates | Faith Freedom International | ||
Pakistan | WikiIslam & Answering Islam | ||
2008 | Saudi Arabia | Faith Freedom International | |
Iran | Faith Freedom International | ||
2007 | Saudi Arabia | Faith Freedom International | |
Iran | Faith Freedom International | ||
Pakistan | Faith Freedom International | ||
Kuwait | Faith Freedom International | Some ISP level blocks | |
Indonesia | Faith Freedom International | Some ISP level blocks | |
2006 | Saudi Arabia | Faith Freedom International | |
Iran | Faith Freedom International | ||
Pakistan | Faith Freedom International |
While this restriction certainly won't stop editors from adding non-censorship, news incidents, and stuff that belongs in country articles if they really want to, I'd like to suggest that editors try to use scholarly sources when writing the article, rather than synthesizing news sources. – Roscelese ( talk ⋅ contribs) 18:06, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
Or this:
Clearly government action. GregJackP Boomer!
We request that editors comment on the following issues: 1) does this article require the use of solely academic sources; 2) does the article require explicit use of the word censorship in the source; and 3) is a restricted definition of censorship to be used, i.e. only by governmental agencies, or is the definition used in the Wikipedia article correct, where censorship may be by the government, media, private groups, or individuals?
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The use of solely academic sources is not required.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
An article does not need to explicitly use the word "censorship" in order to be useful as a source, so long as the meaning is clear from the context of the article.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The definition already in place in the
Censorship article should be used. That definition states: "Censorship is the suppression of speech or other public communication which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or inconvenient as determined by a government, media outlet, or other controlling body. It can be done by governments and private organizations or by individuals who engage in self-censorship."
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Revised definition per conversation above: "Censorship is the suppression of speech or other public communication which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or inconvenient as determined by a government, media outlet, or other controlling body. It can be done by governments and private organizations acting at the behest or with the approval of government.
This article is not List of times Muslims assassinated or attacked people, and also every way in which religion forms part of the state apparatus, and also the times when political censorship took place in a Muslim-majority society. Y'all are claiming that there's a topic here, but your editing isn't bearing that out - if "Islamic censorship" is a thing, then why has nearly all the material added to this article not been about that thing? – Roscelese ( talk ⋅ contribs) 15:33, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
I disagree, but I'm not going to revert. Since you won't let the RFC or AFD play out, I've requested that an admin revert your last deletion and protect the page until we can come to some form of consensus. GregJackP Boomer! 02:39, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
Please identify exactly which references do not meet Wikipedia standards, either by templating the reference or identifying the exact reference on the talk page.
In addition, please identify specific parts of the article that you believe are either Coatrack or a POVfork.
Only by identifying the specific problems can we work on correcting them, or in the event of a disagreement, work at determining what the consensus of the community is.
If the problems are not identified, I will probably remove the tags. Regards, GregJackP Boomer! 00:38, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
I've decided not to bother with this anymore. I'll just prepare another article in userspace. It's not worth trying to improve one here. GregJackP Boomer! 02:57, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
I hope I'm not covering old ground here and I'll admit I'm an atheist, albeit one with an above average understanding of both the new and old testament. If the article included the tragic history of burning of Christian heretics in Europe up to 1612 then it would not appear an attack on a single religion. JRPG ( talk) 16:45, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
Personally, I think full protection while an AfD is going on is ridiculous. We should be allowed to edit the article to improve it. But, whatever, here's some sources we should use.
This is just a sample of possible sources, but it's a starting point. Silver seren C 04:38, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
The lead is a bit of mess. It really needs to summarize the rest of the article.
Also, there should be something about Background of Islamic Thought on Censorship or something like that with discussions on what exactly (in terms of hadith, et cetera) is cited in support of censorship. Comparisons with Catholic church censorship and other cultures would be fantastic.
In terms of nations, everything could be expanded. There's nothing right now on Morocco, Yemen, Bosnia, and many other majority Islamic countries.
Also, the details about Islamic pressure in Western nations should be opened up as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.47.0.74 ( talk) 09:50, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
This whole section is a bit problematic but I've removed the previously closing section as being particularly unencyclopedic.
That something has been cited isn't encyclopedic. Either the information should be stated outright as a fact with the citation being a citation or it simply shouldn't be mentioned. A murder in a country which is not governed in any way by any Islamic organizations does not appear to me to be even remotely close to the slowly developing consensus of what censorship is on this talk page and thus I believe that it and anything like it warrants removal.-- Talain ( talk) 17:17, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
Previously, the section read:
That is, indeed, flatly factually wrong. Saddam personally was not responsible for those actions (being enacted before he had that sort of administrative control in Iraqi history).
With some back and forth, it now says:
And that is completely correct, as per the source. Admittedly, more information is needed about what censorship existed before the 20th century, what censorship exists there today, and... many more things could be added. At least, this is a start.
That is a change from the disputed:
The above text is perhaps technically correct but also misleading (because of what is left out). The source explicitly states that both religious and socio-political concerns played a role in Iraqi censorship. The description of the government as "secularist" is true, but the text should make clear from the context that a secularist government can impose religious censorship. That is exactly what also occurred under (as already cited in this article here elsewhere) Mubarak's Egypt as part of bargaining deals with political opponents.
Thoughts? (P.S. Did not mean for "Please actually read the source cited" to sound like a personal attack, in retrospect it might and that was not the intent.) 72.47.0.74 ( talk) 08:10, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Censorship in Islamic societies. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 10:44, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Censorship in Islamic societies. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.ibtimes.com/hezbollah-issues-fatwa-against-innocence-muslims-makers-rushdie-blasts-movie-790162Hezbollah{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/americas/united-states/120912/should-innocence-muslims-be-censoredShouldWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:01, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Censorship in Islamic societies. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 21:05, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
The disenfranchised inland Berbers revolutionaries replaced the orthodox Almoravids and enforced an even stricter form of Islam, especially in Andalusia. Almohad medieval state-media promoted forced conversions of the double-tax Dhimmis. Opposition including the newly forcefully converted Jewish Tax-collector that warned of the economic consequences of forced conversions, Almohad believed in their ability to keep creating wealth by eternal Jihad using the seemingly unlimited supply of converts to impose the smaller Islamic tax on a bigger population, opposed to the double-tax on the Dhimmi subjects. Dawn prayer daily headcounts were enforced, muslims and converts who didn't appear in dawn prayer rosters were persecuted on a regular basis. Almohad strict censorship played a major role on the reactionary inquisition that enforced a similar reverse censorship campaign. Almohad1184 ( talk) 00:52, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
Dear Wikipedians: As I rarely edit, am posting this as a suggestion for you to consider.
In this section: /info/en/?search=Censorship_in_Islamic_societies#Egypt
The government has used article 44 of the new Egyptian Constitution as justification for their measures, which states "insult or abuse of all religious messengers and prophets shall be prohibited".[25]
However that reference is to an obsolete Egyptian Constitution from before 2014.
In an unofficial English translation of the 2014 Egyptian Constitution I did not find that language: https://www.sis.gov.eg/Newvr/Dustor-en001.pdf .
Recommend removing or rewriting that sentence and the use of the associated footnote.
Sincerely,
Martin L. Buchanan writer and software developer Laramie, WY, USA — Preceding unsigned comment added by MartinLBuchanan ( talk • contribs) 21:15, 16 April 2022 (UTC)