This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
I was looking for this article to find some information regarding Khadijah's religious belief's prior to her conversion to Islam, and I can't find anything. I think this article should have something because I've heard some wacky theories that she was a Catholic who gave Muhammad the idea to base the religion on Christianity and I don't think that's true, but I can't find anything to the contrary. 69.149.82.42 19:27, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
@Grace has victory what evidence? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.76.79.199 ( talk) 18:52, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
Some information was lost in this edition. -- Striver 21:10, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
Khadija's age, and the number of children she bore, and to whom, are hotly contested by Sunni and Shi'a polemicists. People have been trying to wrench the article one way or the other. We need to have both sides represented. We give the Sunni arguments and the Shi'a arguments. Then the reader can decide. Can some other editor help with this? Zora 10:10, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
When he married, the Prophet (salla Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) did not seek young virgins, women with no previous sexual experience, or members of his family. Since neither he nor Khadijah were Muslims at the time they married, the question of being Muslim did not arise. His first choice was a twice-married 40-year-old lady with at least 4 children. Marrying when he was 25, he remained monogamous until her death 25 years later. He never considered taking another wife, although all his friends, uncles, and peers were polygamous. [1] -- Striver 02:38, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
Also, some info was lost here -- Striver 02:39, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
More info: Lubaba bint al-Harith - Claimed to be second woman, the same day as her close friend Khadijah -- Striver 03:27, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
Information regarding Waraqah ibn Nawfal should be moved to his entry. -- Islami 00:52, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
The Quran states [33:59] that Prophet Muhammad has daughters (three or more).
I use http://www.al-quran.info -- 88.111.123.155 ( talk) 18:00, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
When was it decided (and voted on) that the page name should be moved from Khadijah bint Khuwaylid to Khadijah binte Khuwaylid? Stoa 22:15, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
It's the correct name. Right now it reads "Khadija daughter Khuwaylid". Binte = daughter of.
It looks like someone changed it back. Can someone please fix it? - John Rigali 20:52, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
Either is technically correct, but she was known as Khadijah bint Khuwaylid!-- 79.69.104.119 ( talk) 19:33, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
When i just looked back, i see that some time ago, i made a redirect that messed with history. Sorry.
I in this version, we see:
And in this version, we see:
Those edits are now not present. Are they accurate? Sources? -- Striver 00:10, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
-- Mindline ( talk) 14:03, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi,
I'm actually not a bro ... Because each one of the references in the first sentence (for example) consist of the number 1, I didn't think that they had to be repeated several times in the same line if they came from the same source, which is why I made the edit(s) that I did. As for the wikipedia clone, I wasn't sure as to whether or not it was one since I didn't notice the disclaimer at the time. Regardless, I added a citation from another site to back up the info instead. Silver crescent 19:30, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
According to the Khuwaylid ibn Asad article, Khadijah is his daughter. According to this article, she is the daughter of Asad ibn Abd-al-Uzza, Khuwaylid's father. Which is it? - John Rigali 20:52, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
The phrase "out of his love for her" when used to explain why Mohammed remained faithful to Khadija is disputable. There are many viable alternatives, and that phrase is definately more a matter of opinion and not fact. It should at least hint at that being one of many outside opinions.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.158.94.103 ( talk • contribs) It's fixed now. dmyersturnbull ⇒ talk 18:45, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
Perhaps I missed it in the article, but from what belief system did she convert? An earlier edit said she was Jewish, but discussion above claims that is false. Jack Chick claims she was Catholic, but... yeah. Was she Nestorian like Waraqah, or is it not certain if she held any particular belief system? And again, sorry if it's in the article and I just missed it. - BaronGrackle 22:10, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
If she was a successful (and, I presume, educated and literate) businesswoman, how do some Islamic societies, such as the Taliban or the current Saudi Arabian regime, justify their own rules for what women may or may not be permitted to do, in terms of the history of their religion vis-a-vis Muhammad's wife Khadijah, who was clearly a liberated, independent, educated, and economically successful woman? Badagnani 23:57, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
I just want to give an advice regarding this part of the article. It is related to logic and clearness rather than content.
By reading the tittle of the article one gets the impression that Khadija was the first among women to convert to Islam but when reading the text we find out that she was the first among men and women to convert to Islam. I suggest that you change the title to "became the first Muslim among men" or simply " khadija became the first muslim". I think if you do so text an tittle acquire a better cohesion.
thank you Yseutz 20:24, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
This article is unencyclopedic, very apologetic, and lacks sources. Arrow740 00:36, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
agreed Jdmontoya36 14:30, 13 March 2012 (PTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alberto_Rivera#Allegations_that_the_Church_created_Islam No mention is made of Khadijah's Roman Catholic faith, that I have often read about.-- Filll ( talk | wpc) 20:16, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
This isn't even a complete sentence:
"By 585, Khadijah , even though she was sought for marriage by many honorable and highly respected men of the Arabian peninsula, throughout which she was quite famous, due to her business dealings."
I am assuming this is an intro to a passage about her first marriage. But no more information of that nature follows.
Then:
"She also trusted Maysarah's account regarding her new employee's conduct, an account that was most striking, indeed one that encouraged her to abandon her decision never to marry again."
There is nothing about her having been married at all prior to meeting Muhammed.
There is another heading with a link to some additional information, why isn't it in the article?
Ashabhosle ( talk) 22:13, 6 October 2009 (UTC)asha
Recently there have been removal of content from the Relatives section of this article. It has been claimed that the removed section was good faith, not relevant, original research & unsourced.
I want to analyse the situation of this section.
First I'll start with section of the article which is being removed, following is the section:
Based on narrations found even in Sunnī [1] sources, Muhammad said that daughters of his household could only marry those who were from Banū Hāshim. [1].
But(if it is assumed that Zainab, Ruqayyah and Umm Kulthum were daughter of Muhammed and Khadijah) this argument does not seem to be correct as:
- Zainab was married to Abu al-Aas ibn al-Rabee who belonged to Banu Abd Shams clan of the tribe Quraish.
- Ruqayyah and after her death Umm Kulthum were married to Uthman bin Affan who belonged to Banu Umayya clan of the tribe Quraish [2].
This section has states narration from Muhammad and then states that actual situation(of marriage) for three of his attributed daughters was contrary to the narration. It has got two references; one for narration and other for marriage situation. So, here two facts are being presented and corelated which does not constitute original research, as this content is sourced so it is verifiable and seeing the situation of controversey over status of these three ladies as daughter of Muhammad (or even of Khadijah) this section gives coverage to other(Shia) point of view and gives the neutral point of view of article by balancing the counter-opinion. Hence, this section is according to the Wikipedia's three core content policies.
Now I'll analyse remaining section one by one:
The daughters attributed to Muhammad are;
- Zainab bint Muhammad, married to her maternal cousin Abu al-Aas ibn al-Rabee before al-Hijra
- Ruqayyah bint Muhammad, was married to Uthman ibn Affan
- Umm Kulthum bint Muhammad, also married to Uthman ibn Affan after the death of her sister Ruqayyah
- Fatimah, the youngest was married to Ali ('Ali bin Abi Talib)
Although it has got no reference but as it is a fact we can do without it.
According to some Shia sources she only had one daughter, Fatimah. The others either belonged to her sister or were orphaned girls raised by her.
There is no source specified. This can count as original research & no verifiable.
Possibly, all of them were Khadijah's but only Fatimah was born to Muhammad.
There is no source specified. This can count as original research & no verifiable.
Sunni Muslims however do not contest the parentage of her daughters. They affirm what the Qur'an states: "O Prophet! Tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers...". [3]
Source specified for Ayat of Quran but not for opinion. This can count as original research & no verifiable.
The famous Sunni scholar Yusuf ibn abd al-Barr says: "His children born of Khadīja are four daughters; there is no difference of opinion about that". [4]
Source specified. This is sound.
Sections Sunni Muslim view part 2 & Marriage rules are the only factual, verifiable & neutral point of view sections. All other sections are either original research, non verifiable or non neutral point of view. So, either we should remove those sections or source them to proove that they are factual, verifiable & neutral.
-- Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider t c s 14:34, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
References
There are allot of wrong information in the text. They should pick their refrences more carefully. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Butterfly2k ( talk • contribs) 13:11, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi everyone, in reading over this article for the first time today, there are some definite issues with it: namely, in the subsection "Becoming the First Muslim." Why are two modern authors quoted as sources for the events here, especially considering that one is actually an author of fiction? There seems to be absolutely no reason why they should be included there, as they certainly can't be considered reasonable sources for events that occurred more than 1300+ years before they lived. Before I start editing things here, however, I figured I'd ask regarding the reasoning. Riskbreaker2987 ( talk) 18:41, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
The portrait of Khadijah as seen on this article is offensive to Muslims as she was the wife of their Prophet.
Please remove it as soon as possible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Supervisor2011 ( talk • contribs) 15:00, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
The Biography section of this article says Khadijah refused all offers of marriage, but the very next section lists her as a widow when she married the Prophet Muhammed. When and who did she marry? Perhaps this is all quite evident to those raised in the Islamic faith, but as an outsider I am rather confused. Ella Plantagenet ( talk) 12:06, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
According the article, Muhammad was married to "mother of Jesus" which makes me think of the mother Mary. Now, asides from theological beliefs of marriage occurring in the afterlife, I want to know how this is possible since Muhammad didn't exist until 600 years after Jesus and Mary. Furthermore, give to accredited citation/reference, not a random website.
According the article, Muhammad was married to "mother of Jesus" which makes me think of the mother Mary. Now, asides from theological beliefs of marriage occurring in the afterlife, I want to know how this is possible since Muhammad didn't exist until 600 years after Jesus and Mary. Furthermore, give to accredited citation/reference, not a random website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdmontoya36 ( talk • contribs) 21:29, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
The result of the proposal was no consensus. -- BDD ( talk) 00:47, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
Khadija bint Khuwaylid → Khadija – Per common name. The earliest notable usage of this name comes from the subject of this article Relisted. BDD ( talk) 21:41, 5 November 2013 (UTC) Pass a Method talk 14:49, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Revert undiscussed move back to immediately prior RM result ( non-admin closure). In ictu oculi ( talk) 23:16, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
Khadija (Islamic figure) → Khadija bint Khuwaylid – Suggest revert back to original name. The article was moved to Khadija (Islamic figure) without discussion, following the lack of consensus in the move discussion above. Virtually all the links go to Khadija bint Khuwaylid. And a character this important in history deserves her patronymic. 101.119.15.117 ( talk) 08:43, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Khadija bint Khuwaylid. 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 18:35, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
I was looking for this article to find some information regarding Khadijah's religious belief's prior to her conversion to Islam, and I can't find anything. I think this article should have something because I've heard some wacky theories that she was a Catholic who gave Muhammad the idea to base the religion on Christianity and I don't think that's true, but I can't find anything to the contrary. 69.149.82.42 19:27, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
@Grace has victory what evidence? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.76.79.199 ( talk) 18:52, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
Some information was lost in this edition. -- Striver 21:10, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
Khadija's age, and the number of children she bore, and to whom, are hotly contested by Sunni and Shi'a polemicists. People have been trying to wrench the article one way or the other. We need to have both sides represented. We give the Sunni arguments and the Shi'a arguments. Then the reader can decide. Can some other editor help with this? Zora 10:10, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
When he married, the Prophet (salla Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) did not seek young virgins, women with no previous sexual experience, or members of his family. Since neither he nor Khadijah were Muslims at the time they married, the question of being Muslim did not arise. His first choice was a twice-married 40-year-old lady with at least 4 children. Marrying when he was 25, he remained monogamous until her death 25 years later. He never considered taking another wife, although all his friends, uncles, and peers were polygamous. [1] -- Striver 02:38, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
Also, some info was lost here -- Striver 02:39, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
More info: Lubaba bint al-Harith - Claimed to be second woman, the same day as her close friend Khadijah -- Striver 03:27, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
Information regarding Waraqah ibn Nawfal should be moved to his entry. -- Islami 00:52, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
The Quran states [33:59] that Prophet Muhammad has daughters (three or more).
I use http://www.al-quran.info -- 88.111.123.155 ( talk) 18:00, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
When was it decided (and voted on) that the page name should be moved from Khadijah bint Khuwaylid to Khadijah binte Khuwaylid? Stoa 22:15, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
It's the correct name. Right now it reads "Khadija daughter Khuwaylid". Binte = daughter of.
It looks like someone changed it back. Can someone please fix it? - John Rigali 20:52, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
Either is technically correct, but she was known as Khadijah bint Khuwaylid!-- 79.69.104.119 ( talk) 19:33, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
When i just looked back, i see that some time ago, i made a redirect that messed with history. Sorry.
I in this version, we see:
And in this version, we see:
Those edits are now not present. Are they accurate? Sources? -- Striver 00:10, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
-- Mindline ( talk) 14:03, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
Hi,
I'm actually not a bro ... Because each one of the references in the first sentence (for example) consist of the number 1, I didn't think that they had to be repeated several times in the same line if they came from the same source, which is why I made the edit(s) that I did. As for the wikipedia clone, I wasn't sure as to whether or not it was one since I didn't notice the disclaimer at the time. Regardless, I added a citation from another site to back up the info instead. Silver crescent 19:30, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
According to the Khuwaylid ibn Asad article, Khadijah is his daughter. According to this article, she is the daughter of Asad ibn Abd-al-Uzza, Khuwaylid's father. Which is it? - John Rigali 20:52, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
The phrase "out of his love for her" when used to explain why Mohammed remained faithful to Khadija is disputable. There are many viable alternatives, and that phrase is definately more a matter of opinion and not fact. It should at least hint at that being one of many outside opinions.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.158.94.103 ( talk • contribs) It's fixed now. dmyersturnbull ⇒ talk 18:45, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
Perhaps I missed it in the article, but from what belief system did she convert? An earlier edit said she was Jewish, but discussion above claims that is false. Jack Chick claims she was Catholic, but... yeah. Was she Nestorian like Waraqah, or is it not certain if she held any particular belief system? And again, sorry if it's in the article and I just missed it. - BaronGrackle 22:10, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
If she was a successful (and, I presume, educated and literate) businesswoman, how do some Islamic societies, such as the Taliban or the current Saudi Arabian regime, justify their own rules for what women may or may not be permitted to do, in terms of the history of their religion vis-a-vis Muhammad's wife Khadijah, who was clearly a liberated, independent, educated, and economically successful woman? Badagnani 23:57, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
I just want to give an advice regarding this part of the article. It is related to logic and clearness rather than content.
By reading the tittle of the article one gets the impression that Khadija was the first among women to convert to Islam but when reading the text we find out that she was the first among men and women to convert to Islam. I suggest that you change the title to "became the first Muslim among men" or simply " khadija became the first muslim". I think if you do so text an tittle acquire a better cohesion.
thank you Yseutz 20:24, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
This article is unencyclopedic, very apologetic, and lacks sources. Arrow740 00:36, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
agreed Jdmontoya36 14:30, 13 March 2012 (PTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alberto_Rivera#Allegations_that_the_Church_created_Islam No mention is made of Khadijah's Roman Catholic faith, that I have often read about.-- Filll ( talk | wpc) 20:16, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
This isn't even a complete sentence:
"By 585, Khadijah , even though she was sought for marriage by many honorable and highly respected men of the Arabian peninsula, throughout which she was quite famous, due to her business dealings."
I am assuming this is an intro to a passage about her first marriage. But no more information of that nature follows.
Then:
"She also trusted Maysarah's account regarding her new employee's conduct, an account that was most striking, indeed one that encouraged her to abandon her decision never to marry again."
There is nothing about her having been married at all prior to meeting Muhammed.
There is another heading with a link to some additional information, why isn't it in the article?
Ashabhosle ( talk) 22:13, 6 October 2009 (UTC)asha
Recently there have been removal of content from the Relatives section of this article. It has been claimed that the removed section was good faith, not relevant, original research & unsourced.
I want to analyse the situation of this section.
First I'll start with section of the article which is being removed, following is the section:
Based on narrations found even in Sunnī [1] sources, Muhammad said that daughters of his household could only marry those who were from Banū Hāshim. [1].
But(if it is assumed that Zainab, Ruqayyah and Umm Kulthum were daughter of Muhammed and Khadijah) this argument does not seem to be correct as:
- Zainab was married to Abu al-Aas ibn al-Rabee who belonged to Banu Abd Shams clan of the tribe Quraish.
- Ruqayyah and after her death Umm Kulthum were married to Uthman bin Affan who belonged to Banu Umayya clan of the tribe Quraish [2].
This section has states narration from Muhammad and then states that actual situation(of marriage) for three of his attributed daughters was contrary to the narration. It has got two references; one for narration and other for marriage situation. So, here two facts are being presented and corelated which does not constitute original research, as this content is sourced so it is verifiable and seeing the situation of controversey over status of these three ladies as daughter of Muhammad (or even of Khadijah) this section gives coverage to other(Shia) point of view and gives the neutral point of view of article by balancing the counter-opinion. Hence, this section is according to the Wikipedia's three core content policies.
Now I'll analyse remaining section one by one:
The daughters attributed to Muhammad are;
- Zainab bint Muhammad, married to her maternal cousin Abu al-Aas ibn al-Rabee before al-Hijra
- Ruqayyah bint Muhammad, was married to Uthman ibn Affan
- Umm Kulthum bint Muhammad, also married to Uthman ibn Affan after the death of her sister Ruqayyah
- Fatimah, the youngest was married to Ali ('Ali bin Abi Talib)
Although it has got no reference but as it is a fact we can do without it.
According to some Shia sources she only had one daughter, Fatimah. The others either belonged to her sister or were orphaned girls raised by her.
There is no source specified. This can count as original research & no verifiable.
Possibly, all of them were Khadijah's but only Fatimah was born to Muhammad.
There is no source specified. This can count as original research & no verifiable.
Sunni Muslims however do not contest the parentage of her daughters. They affirm what the Qur'an states: "O Prophet! Tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers...". [3]
Source specified for Ayat of Quran but not for opinion. This can count as original research & no verifiable.
The famous Sunni scholar Yusuf ibn abd al-Barr says: "His children born of Khadīja are four daughters; there is no difference of opinion about that". [4]
Source specified. This is sound.
Sections Sunni Muslim view part 2 & Marriage rules are the only factual, verifiable & neutral point of view sections. All other sections are either original research, non verifiable or non neutral point of view. So, either we should remove those sections or source them to proove that they are factual, verifiable & neutral.
-- Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider t c s 14:34, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
References
There are allot of wrong information in the text. They should pick their refrences more carefully. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Butterfly2k ( talk • contribs) 13:11, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi everyone, in reading over this article for the first time today, there are some definite issues with it: namely, in the subsection "Becoming the First Muslim." Why are two modern authors quoted as sources for the events here, especially considering that one is actually an author of fiction? There seems to be absolutely no reason why they should be included there, as they certainly can't be considered reasonable sources for events that occurred more than 1300+ years before they lived. Before I start editing things here, however, I figured I'd ask regarding the reasoning. Riskbreaker2987 ( talk) 18:41, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
The portrait of Khadijah as seen on this article is offensive to Muslims as she was the wife of their Prophet.
Please remove it as soon as possible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Supervisor2011 ( talk • contribs) 15:00, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
The Biography section of this article says Khadijah refused all offers of marriage, but the very next section lists her as a widow when she married the Prophet Muhammed. When and who did she marry? Perhaps this is all quite evident to those raised in the Islamic faith, but as an outsider I am rather confused. Ella Plantagenet ( talk) 12:06, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
According the article, Muhammad was married to "mother of Jesus" which makes me think of the mother Mary. Now, asides from theological beliefs of marriage occurring in the afterlife, I want to know how this is possible since Muhammad didn't exist until 600 years after Jesus and Mary. Furthermore, give to accredited citation/reference, not a random website.
According the article, Muhammad was married to "mother of Jesus" which makes me think of the mother Mary. Now, asides from theological beliefs of marriage occurring in the afterlife, I want to know how this is possible since Muhammad didn't exist until 600 years after Jesus and Mary. Furthermore, give to accredited citation/reference, not a random website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdmontoya36 ( talk • contribs) 21:29, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
The result of the proposal was no consensus. -- BDD ( talk) 00:47, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
Khadija bint Khuwaylid → Khadija – Per common name. The earliest notable usage of this name comes from the subject of this article Relisted. BDD ( talk) 21:41, 5 November 2013 (UTC) Pass a Method talk 14:49, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Revert undiscussed move back to immediately prior RM result ( non-admin closure). In ictu oculi ( talk) 23:16, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
Khadija (Islamic figure) → Khadija bint Khuwaylid – Suggest revert back to original name. The article was moved to Khadija (Islamic figure) without discussion, following the lack of consensus in the move discussion above. Virtually all the links go to Khadija bint Khuwaylid. And a character this important in history deserves her patronymic. 101.119.15.117 ( talk) 08:43, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Khadija bint Khuwaylid. 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 18:35, 28 January 2016 (UTC)