![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 22 January 2016. The result of the discussion was delete. |
![]() | A fact from Hijabophobia appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 5 November 2018 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
| ![]() |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 3 September 2019 and 12 December 2019. Further details are available
on the course page. Peer reviewers:
Aaditjaveri.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 22:21, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 13:07, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
AadaamS: Per
WP:SYNTH "A and B, therefore C" is acceptable only if a reliable source has published the same argument in relation to the topic of the article."
So, if there's a reliable source, for example, making relations between "Hijabophobia" and "discrimination against Hijab", other sources talking about "discrimination against Hijab" can safely be used in
Hijabophobia. So, "word 'Hijabophobia' not in any of the sources" is not correct argument. Thus, I'm reverting those un-discussed mass removals as per the policy based argument I made. You're advised to discuss with other active editors involved in the article before making such a huge change. --
Mhhossein
talk
17:44, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
@ Aronanki and Doug Weller: Regarding this edit, I think the rational raised for the change is acceptable, however I'm not sure if the change is supported by the source. -- Mhhossein talk 17:04, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
If Mirriam Webster describes it as "of or relating to large groups of people classed according to common racial, national, tribal, religious, linguistic, or cultural origin or background" how is it distinguished from the term cultural? [1]
References
{{
cite web}}
: Missing or empty |title=
(
help)
@ Reidgreg and AadaamS: A user is edit warring ( [1], [2]) based on his on own interpretations of the term's history. This book writes: "Hamzeh's (2012) term 'hijabophobia' encapsulates the sexist and racist discourses of this discrimination." This scholarly source verifies that the term was coined by Hamzeh; "... Hamzeh (2011) coined the term “hijabophobia” to directly refer to the gendered aspect of Islamophobia". another source, which is a master thesis, saying it was "identified by Hamzeh as hijabophobia (Hamzeh 2011, 484)". However, there's another source, also a thesis, saying it was coined in 1990s by European researchers. I'm not sure if the the two thesis can be taken into account, but the first book seems reliable. -- Mhhossein talk 03:13, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
Masters dissertations and theses are considered reliable only if they can be shown to have had significant scholarly influenceand no such proof is given. You're advised to familiarise yourself with guidelines for finding reliable sources suitable to use. Also, Baugerud uses Autoethnography as a method, which according to the enWP article means that
an author uses self-reflection and writing to explore anecdotal and personal experience and connect this autobiographical story. It can be questioned whether an autobiography with anecdotal evidence from a non-established scholar/expert and a master level student is hardly an established scholar, can give any general conclusions or summaries on any topic suitable for an encyclopedia. Happy editing, AadaamS ( talk) 06:12, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 04:51, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
@MBisanz, Hi. At the top of this talk page in a box reads: "This article was nominated for deletion on 22 January 2016. The result of the discussion was delete." However, the article exists. I can not find any other discussions against deletion. Gharouni Talk 07:30, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 22 January 2016. The result of the discussion was delete. |
![]() | A fact from Hijabophobia appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 5 November 2018 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
| ![]() |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 3 September 2019 and 12 December 2019. Further details are available
on the course page. Peer reviewers:
Aaditjaveri.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 22:21, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 13:07, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
AadaamS: Per
WP:SYNTH "A and B, therefore C" is acceptable only if a reliable source has published the same argument in relation to the topic of the article."
So, if there's a reliable source, for example, making relations between "Hijabophobia" and "discrimination against Hijab", other sources talking about "discrimination against Hijab" can safely be used in
Hijabophobia. So, "word 'Hijabophobia' not in any of the sources" is not correct argument. Thus, I'm reverting those un-discussed mass removals as per the policy based argument I made. You're advised to discuss with other active editors involved in the article before making such a huge change. --
Mhhossein
talk
17:44, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
@ Aronanki and Doug Weller: Regarding this edit, I think the rational raised for the change is acceptable, however I'm not sure if the change is supported by the source. -- Mhhossein talk 17:04, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
If Mirriam Webster describes it as "of or relating to large groups of people classed according to common racial, national, tribal, religious, linguistic, or cultural origin or background" how is it distinguished from the term cultural? [1]
References
{{
cite web}}
: Missing or empty |title=
(
help)
@ Reidgreg and AadaamS: A user is edit warring ( [1], [2]) based on his on own interpretations of the term's history. This book writes: "Hamzeh's (2012) term 'hijabophobia' encapsulates the sexist and racist discourses of this discrimination." This scholarly source verifies that the term was coined by Hamzeh; "... Hamzeh (2011) coined the term “hijabophobia” to directly refer to the gendered aspect of Islamophobia". another source, which is a master thesis, saying it was "identified by Hamzeh as hijabophobia (Hamzeh 2011, 484)". However, there's another source, also a thesis, saying it was coined in 1990s by European researchers. I'm not sure if the the two thesis can be taken into account, but the first book seems reliable. -- Mhhossein talk 03:13, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
Masters dissertations and theses are considered reliable only if they can be shown to have had significant scholarly influenceand no such proof is given. You're advised to familiarise yourself with guidelines for finding reliable sources suitable to use. Also, Baugerud uses Autoethnography as a method, which according to the enWP article means that
an author uses self-reflection and writing to explore anecdotal and personal experience and connect this autobiographical story. It can be questioned whether an autobiography with anecdotal evidence from a non-established scholar/expert and a master level student is hardly an established scholar, can give any general conclusions or summaries on any topic suitable for an encyclopedia. Happy editing, AadaamS ( talk) 06:12, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 04:51, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
@MBisanz, Hi. At the top of this talk page in a box reads: "This article was nominated for deletion on 22 January 2016. The result of the discussion was delete." However, the article exists. I can not find any other discussions against deletion. Gharouni Talk 07:30, 11 March 2023 (UTC)