This page 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. |
Assalamo alaikum, I am trying to complete one article on Indian Islamic Culture center located at New Delhi. Could you please take a look on this article and contribute more on this to get it approved on Wikipedia. thanks you Rashid Jorvee ( talk) 10:41, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
Walaikum salam - Looks like your article was declined. you may want to look into it. All the best! Mitsurugi78 ( talk) 23:01, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
A user has been going around linking occurrences of "non-Muslim" to Kafir. [1] That seems ill advised as kufr has more to do with theology and kafir is at present considered a pejorative. What do others think? VR talk 14:07, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
FYI: Template talk:Islam#Image again. -- HyperGaruda ( talk) 07:10, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
Hi all, I've boldly updated your project's peer review page ( Wikipedia:WikiProject Islam/Peer review) by updating the instructions and archiving old reviews.
The new instructions use Wikipedia's general peer review process ( WP:PR) to list peer reviews. Your project's reviews are still able to be listed on your local page too.
The benefits of this change is that review requests will get seen by a wider audience and are likely to be attended to in a more timely way (many WikiProject peer reviews remain unanswered after years). The Wikipedia peer review process is also more maintained than most WikiProjects, and this may help save time for your active members.
I've done this boldly as it seems your peer review page is pretty inactive and I am working through around 90 such similar peer review pages. Please feel free to discuss below - please ping me ({{ u|Tom (LT)}}) in your response.
Cheers and hope you are well, Tom (LT) ( talk) 23:07, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
Template:Rashidun princes and princesses has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Alivardi (talk) 16:59, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Superstitions in Muslim societies is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Superstitions in Muslim societies until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Bookku ( talk) 05:23, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
If I go through the madhhabs named in the Amman Message, we have articles at the single-word titles Hanafi, Maliki, Hanbali, Zaidiyyah, and Zahiri. We also have articles on the other three, at Shafi'i school, Ja'fari jurisprudence and Ibadi Islam.
For the sake of consistency, I feel it would be better to move the last three articles to single-word titles Shafi'i, Ja'fari, and Ibadi. I will post pointers at the talk pages shortly.
While I am fairly clueless about the subject, reading the articles, at least Shafi'i and Ja'fari articles seem pretty parallel to the Hanafi etc. ones - dealing mostly with a view on the interpretation of law and how it came about. The Ibadi article mostly is, too, although it contains some significant historical/demographic information so arguably it should not be lumped together.
Any thoughts? If the Amman message is somehow controversial and other schools ought to be included in the debate, please educate me. Tigraan Click here to contact me 16:58, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
Salam, greetings, Can French speakers translate this article ( Anti-Capitalist Muslims) to english? Thanks. Signed, ~𝓐𝓭𝓲𝓰𝓪𝓫𝓻𝓮𝓴 𝓽𝓱𝓮 𝓕𝓲𝓻𝓼𝓽~ Contact 18:47, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
Right now google is showing mirza maroof ahmed as caliphate of islam on wikpedia.which is totally wrong and biased.it should be immediately removed.The 29-year rule of the Rashidun was Islam’s first experience without the leadership of the Prophet Muhammad. His example, however, in both private and public life, came to be regarded as the norm (Sunnah) for his successors, and a large and influential body of anṣār (companions of the Prophet) kept close watch on the caliphs to ensure their strict adherence to divine revelation (the Qurʾān) and the Sunnah. The Rashidun thus assumed all of Muhammad’s duties except the prophetic: as imams, they led the congregation in prayer at the mosque; as khaṭībs, they delivered the Friday sermons; and as umarāʾ al-muʾminīn (“commanders of the faithful”), they commanded the army.
The caliphate of the Rashidun, in which virtually all actions had religious import, began with the wars of the riddah (“apostasy”; 632–633), tribal uprisings in Arabia, and ended with the first Muslim civil war (fitnah; 656–661). It effected the expansion of the Islamic state beyond Arabia into Iraq, Syria, Palestine, Egypt, Iran, and Armenia and, with it, the development of an elite class of Arab soldiers. The Rashidun were also responsible for the adoption of an Islamic calendar, dating from Muhammad’s emigration (Hijrah) from Mecca to Medina (622), and the establishment of an authoritative reading of the Qurʾān, which strengthened the Muslim community and encouraged religious scholarship. [1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Malikawan123 ( talk • contribs) 08:00, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello, I've created my first page for Nasheed singer Ismail Hussain Ismail_Hussain_Singer. Need your valueble suggestions and support to keep it alive on Wikipedia. Thanks— Preceding unsigned comment added by LwdBell ( talk • contribs) — Preceding undated comment added 13:37, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
I've collected some articles with Islam-related links to DAB pages, where expert attention would be welcome. Search for "disam" in read mode and for "{{d" in edit mode; and if you solve any of these puzzles, remove the {{ dn}} tag and post {{ done}} here.
Thanks in advance, Narky Blert ( talk) 18:05, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
JorgeLaArdilla has been making edits to the articles on the Suras of the Quran (example: [4], but there are many similar edits in his recent contribution in other sura articles), that I'd like the community's opinion on. I think adding a list-style content when there is already an existing prose that covers the same purpose is discouraged per MOS:PROSE, plus the list that was added was attributed to one interpreter only (George Sale from the 18th century) which seems inappropriate per WP:WEIGHT. Other than these I don't think the edits were an improvements to the article, but wondering what others here think. I tried to revert but the author restored them saying "Dont remove referenced content" without addressing the reasoning in my edit summary. This kind of interaction has happened before with this editor too. HaEr48 ( talk) 20:31, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
For Surah summaries a good source is "The Clear Quran" by Dr. Mustafa Khattab. Might be a good source to check out for those interested. Mitsurugi78 ( talk) — Preceding undated comment added 15:25, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
I have come across the "Summary of Holy Quran: An Ultimate Guide Series" by Muhammad Farooq and Nagina Kanwal. It seems like a pretty good summary of each surah in the Quran based on my reading. It's not very verbose like a classical tafsir collection but it definitely covers the main points at a very high level. KuroNekoNiyah ( talk) 02:11, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
You've done a lot of hard work. I say it to @ Onel5969: - thank you! It has been a pleasure for me but I guess a chore for you. Didn't think about it before. Also
making redirects for Quranic verses (e.g. Q37:35). Instead of that I think it is better to externally link
The article Criticism of Muhammad is a WP:POVFORK as it currently only covers the Prophet Muhammad in a negative light. Wikipedia:Content_forking#Point_of_view_(POV)_forks says,
Any daughter article that deals with opinions about the subject of parent article must include suitably-weighted positive and negative opinions, and/or rebuttals, if available, and the original article should contain a neutral summary of the split article. There is currently no consensus whether a "Criticism of..." article is always a POV fork, but many criticism articles nevertheless suffer from POV problems. If possible, refrain from using "criticism" and instead use neutral terms such as "perception" or "reception"; if the word "criticism" must be used, make sure that such criticism considers both the merits and faults, and is not entirely negative.
There are sources that praise Muhammad and excluding that point of view violates neutrality. There have been discussions at Talk:Criticism_of_Muhammad#Praises_of_the_Prophet_Muhammad and Talk:Criticism_of_Muhammad#Responses_to_'criticism'. Alternative names proposed include:
Pinging for feedback the editors involved in that article's discussion page: @ Anachronist: @ A.889: @ Wakemeup38: @ Sa.vakilian: @ Ghazaalch: @ Maplecreek1: @ Cleopatran Apocalypse: Bless ( talk) 03:55, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
I kindly ask you to take a look at the draft Sujud Tilawa and make the necessary improvements and corrections. Cordially.
-- Kalimoun ( talk) 11:02, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
There is an ongoing discussion above about chaning the name of the article about "Re-education camps" in Xinjiang to another name such as "Internment Camp" or "Concentratin Camp". You are welcome to participate. // Timothy :: t | c | a 07:56, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
I've opened a page move discussion in regards to changing
Shia Islam to
Shi'ism. Feel free to give your imput.
Alivardi
(talk)
14:18, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
Talk:Uyghur genocide#I suggest adding a new section, as people start to question the truthfulness of the "Uyghur genocide" The thread name above is self explanitory. // Timothy :: talk 09:49, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Moorish Castle#Requested move 23 January 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vpab15 ( talk) 19:41, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
I have started a draft on As-Sirah an-Nabawiyyah by Ibn Hisham. I could use some feedback on improving the article. KuroNekoNiyah ( talk) 03:07, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello. I am working on Fatimah bint Asad. Could you please name some other reliable sources I could use improving this article? Thanks. Ghazaalch ( talk) 03:50, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
This stub has been tagged for several issues for over ten years! Bearian ( talk) 20:46, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
Hello,
So the Wahhabism page has been locked for the next 3 days due to edit warring. When I looked over the edit history, significant edits have been made that either point to a problem with how the article was previously or how the article looks now. Hoping some editors with knowledge of the topic might have some time to take a look and see which way is up. I can wade through sources but don't really have a framework to properly evaluate. Slywriter ( talk) 21:41, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2021 March 6 § File:Manqabat-e-Qari Muslehuddin.jpg. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 03:11, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
There’s a new user at Legal system of Saudi Arabia that’s made this change x3 both as an IP and under their new account. There is a POV there but I can’t actually figure out what it is - there’s a talk page discusion I’ve been having with them but I’m none the wiser what they’re up to. Their edits are a mixture of being unsourced and against the inline citations, poor English or just don’t make sense, or using as a source a website called sharialaw.org which looks non-RS/SELFPUB. The issue itself revolves (I think) around what will be quite an obscure topic for most people: whether Saudi Arabia uses Hanbali, one of four Islamic (Sunni) legal schools of thought (known as Maddhab), in its law courts or whether it should be described as Wahhabism which is certainly the dominant religious movement in the country. I’ve not seen any sources that say Saudi’s law courts don’t follow Hanbali. It’s a low traffic article and on obscure topic hence I’m trying to get other inputs. That’s a bit of a long shot I know but if anyone one is inclined, please take a look. (I’ll post this at a couple of other Wikiprojects). DeCausa ( talk) 09:09, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
Sunni view of Ali ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). This article has long been neglected. Bashir Iran ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has been edit warring with an IP to include content. I redirected the article to the relevant section on the main Ali article, but Bashir reverted me. Bashir has been adding unreliable content to other articles (more specifically claiming that mammoths were mentioned in the Shahnameh without any sourcing which is ludicrous), but I don't know enough about Islam to evaluate the content in the article, so I hope somone more familiar with the topic can take a look. Cheers. Hemiauchenia ( talk) 00:02, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi WikiProject Islam, I've been working on the Xinjiang papers article. Please feel free to make edits or provide feedback on how I can raise my article rating. I'm new to Wikipedia editing and still trying to learn! Thanks. Couchcupcross ( talk) 12:56, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
Ilhan Omar has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 01:33, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
Islam, that wish to enforce what they see as a distinction in the sexes, as well as the prohibition of women revealing the contour legs, requiring all women and young girls to wear a long dress or skirt rather than trousers
this is wrong! I live in Central Asia and traditional islamic dress code is required to wear long trousers under a long dress or skirt ( Idot ( talk) 16:01, 14 June 2021 (UTC))
Basically, finding the right hadith from the hadith references seem to be an issue from time to time because various publishers and authenticators will use different numbering and different order of the chapters even though there are standards for hadith referencing. For example, one might use Sahih Muslim xyz and another might use abc but abc will typically be a number close to xyz. This leads to the references present being practically invalid in the exemplary use case (that is, if someone uses one publisher instead of the other). So, while one can find the hadith by making an effort, it is often very time consuming. Finding a referenced hadith can also become a hassle especially if the cited webpage where the hadith was supposed to be is now dead.
This issue may be avoided by changing the style of the references. Basically, even though the overall hadith number may vary, the relative number typically doesn't - as in, the hadith will still have the same serial of the same chapter. Therefore, if we use the name of the chapter and the serial number of the hadith in that chapter - then the hadith will be the easiest to find even if the overall number and the order of the chapters and thus, the chapter number varies. This will work well in translation as well since the meaning of the book headings in translation remain similar. Should/can this be implemented? - Sultan.abdullah.hindi ( talk) 19:30, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
Dear JorgeLaArdilla, I think those references (in this case, inside the quotation system) are non-functional and thus, make very good examples of my point. For the first, we could instead add details to the reference in order to indicate the book (section) in Sahih Muslim that it is taken from - as in, to add the details that the relevant hadith is Hadith 13 of Book 38, The Book of Manners and Etiquette. I prefer to present that as: Book 38 (Manners and Etiquette), Hadith 13. This is added inside the reference so as to prevent clutter. In the case of the reference from Ibn Kathir, which isn't a book of hadith but rather a book of Qur'anic exegesis, it isn't as necessary because 19:28 seems to be a verse reference in the Qur'an which is completely standardized and not subject to change and someone can just look it up in the contents section of the book. I think that the references to the Qur'an can also be improved by including the name of the Surah as well but it isn't strictly necessary to begin with and definitely not as necessary as the improvement to the hadith references. - Sultan.abdullah.hindi ( talk) 06:41, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Um... I'm sorry, nope. Sahih Muslim 2135 was better and that's not exactly what I'm talking about actually. Also, this could be confused by some with Qur'an references which is not a good thing either. What I'm talking about are ref tags referring back to the source.
This is what I'm suggesting be used: <ref>{{Cite web|title=Sahih Muslim 169e|url=https://sunnah.com/muslim/54/123|website=sunnah.com|access-date=17 June 2021}}; In-book reference: Book 54 (Tribulations and Portents of the Last Hour), Hadith 123; Reference: Sahih Muslim 169e</ref>
Instead of: <ref>{{Cite web|title=Sahih Muslim 169e|url=https://sunnah.com/muslim/54/123|website=sunnah.com|access-date=17 June 2021}}; In-book reference: Book 54, Hadith 123; Reference: Sahih Muslim 169e</ref>
Hope that helps -
Sultan.abdullah.hindi (
talk)
13:19, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
That's a relief! Appreciate it, JorgeLaArdilla. I was worried that I might be going against some guidelines. - Sultan.abdullah.hindi ( talk) 19:10, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
As-salamu 'Alaikum wa rahmatullah
In the article Iblis, an editor is presenting his own understanding (as checked from his/her user page) as a valid interpretation in the Interpretations section of the article. S/he also chose to put that interpretation at the top of the list. This understanding is that Iblis is a fallen angel and it seems to be based on a book (Les 100 mots du Coran) by an anthropologist named Malek Chebel who also seems to have a modernist-reformist view of Islam. This does not represent the mainstream position of the Sunni Orthodoxy and this should be clarified in order to avoid misrepresentation of the Sunni Orthodoxy and to not confuse the audience of Wikipedia, esp. because Wikipedia is one of the most widely used online encyclopaedia dispensing information to millions of people of varying ages and educational backgrounds. There are clear restrictions and limitations on what can be represented as the beliefs of the Sunni Orthodoxy. Someone entirely disconnected from the academic tradition of the Sunni Orthodoxy will clearly not understand this and carry on the works of the Orientalists by presenting the opinion of any Fulan and Allan as a position held by the Muslims. One glaring example of this is the matter of camel urine. Just because some Muslim dudes who are ignorant hold a certain position does not mean that it is an accepted position in the Sunni academia. Any help is appreciated. - Sultan.abdullah.hindi ( talk) 17:01, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
some scholars suspect that it could be a mistake of some narrators? Who are the scholars who say that this could be a mistake? VR talk 00:27, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Omar to be moved to Umar. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. ☿ Apaugasma ( talk ☉) 15:27, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
Dear Wikipedia editors, I've noticed that some orientalists have been mentioned under the title of " Islamic scholars" in Wikipeida. It's beyond argument that orientalism and Islamic jurisprudence approaches to this issue from opposite views. Non of us would debate on their essential differences and even rivalry in terms of starting point and acquis. As far as I can see, this mistake is not compatible with Wikipedia's principles. Sincerely Ass Prof V. Selcuk Engin
{{
cite web}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link) CS1 maint: url-status (
link): 8:20 @ Sultan.abdullah.hindi: How would you suggest Bayard Dodge is described? JorgeLaArdilla ( talk) 20:00, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Abdul Hakeem Azhari#Requested move 1 September 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ASUKITE 02:45, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Khadija bint Khuwaylid/Archive 1#Requested move 30 August 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ASUKITE 02:56, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Battle of Marawi#Requested move 10 September 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. — hueman1 ( talk • contributions) 09:02, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant#Requested move 30 August 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. VR talk 18:36, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
The 114 articles about 114 surahs in the Quran are some of the worst POV-filled articles in the encyclopedia and the present status of sourcing is almost never compliant with WP:HISTRS. I will be trimming all the articles, leaving only the lead and properly sourced parts. If you have objections, please note. TrangaBellam ( talk) 17:15, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
This new user who went against the last stable version after a month of no new accusations and said it was unreliable or unsensible he gave no proof that the sources are unreliable he played the same trick ratna played previously and stop me from editing by having the wikipedia page protected and even after lengthy talks in the talk page with a admin c.fred and ratnahattin not even ratnahastin could prove these sources given in my version were unreliable so why has my edit been reverted and page protected so I can't revert it?
My version was stable for a month before this new user and vandal TolWol56 came he reverted to ratnahastins version which the second part ratna wrote wasnt even concerning her which had been addressed. Shouldnt his removal of my text be a consensus before its done?
Tolwol56 plays the same tactics as ratna and accuse me of another user exil who reverted his edits I am not exil but if he keeps playing this game I can accuse him to be ratna is he so eager to use his version and same accusation?
His new accusations is that the sources I used are from taha publications again ratna made this accusation but didnt explain which one.
Even if it did taha publication has been around for forty years I dont see how they are unreliable as a publishing site?
https://www.tahapublishers.com/about-us/
So can anyone deal with this here is the talk page /info/en/?search=Talk:Umm_Qirfa here is my edit whicvh was reverted after a month long period of no new accusation:
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Umm_Qirfa&oldid=1044995801
Template:Unsigned IP -->— Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.40.187.96 (talk) 00:05, 23 Sep 2021 (UTC)
On Wikidata we have recently gotten a property for madhhab (P9929). Currently the only allowed values are Hanafi, Hanbalism, Malikism, Shafi`i, Isma'ilism, Ja'fari, Zaidiyyah, Ibadi, Ẓāhirī and Al-Mawardi
Does the members of WikiProject Islam have any suggestions for improvements? Which value do you think should be allowed and not allowed? King regards-- Trade ( talk) 23:13, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
Islam in Finland, which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. WikiDan61 ChatMe! ReadMe!! 12:39, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
A Peer review request has been made for article Islamic marriage contract to receive a broader perspective on how it may be improved.
Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' ( talk) 09:58, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Tafsir ibn Kathir#Requested move 7 October 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. VR talk 20:32, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
Assalamu alaikum, can some one please check the controversy part of the Islamic Society of Baltimore. Seems like they have omitted a couple of information in the sources they had given. I think it needs to be edited thoroughly. Particularly the edits by Tim [ history)] I reverted those but on closer inspection i think the wording have been biased. for example i mentioned in his talk page that
Can some one help me out as i am still a new editor. Thanks -- LostCitrationHunter ( talk) 17:23, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Islamic studies by author (non-Muslim or academic)#Requested move 10 November 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. VR talk 15:07, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
Assalamu Alaikum. i think the Historical department need more attention. Ahendra ( talk) 13:49, 6 November 2021 (UTC)
Anyway, i personally think Battle of Zhu Qissa should be renamed to Dhu Qissa. Ahendra ( talk) 12:52, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Congregational mosque#Requested move 22 November 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. VR talk 15:43, 22 November 2021 (UTC)
Greetings,
Once in a while I browse topic of Islamic literature to find sources for Islamic advice literature and many times I came across topic of fatalism in Islam and reasonable number of scholarly sources seem to be available. Up til now I have been bypassing the topic and keeping away from mind partially for already too many encyclopedic tasks on hand, and again I did not want to engage in more content dispute issues for a low priority article for me. But still number of times those scholarly work cross me can't think of not covering at all.
Presently en WP has following kind of articles
Requesting inputs which way to give coverage to the topic of 'Fatalism in Islamic world'. Should we start a Draft:Fatalism in Islamic world then decide to keep it separate or merge etc. How to go about it ?
Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' ( talk) 09:13, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
Hello, WikiProject Islam,
I came across this article because the editor keeps moving it around from main space to Draft space and back again. I'm hoping that editors well-versed in Islam could look it over. It seems like it is in pretty bad shape to me but perhaps this individual is notable. I went to post this same message at WikiProject Bangladesh but there is no activity on the talk page so it looks inactive. Thanks for any help you can offer. Liz Read! Talk! 01:41, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Sultan Ahmed Mosque#Requested move 30 November 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. VR talk 13:15, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Musaylimah#Requested move 2 December 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. I hope that you will comment there. Thank you.-- John Cline ( talk) 12:00, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
The ones in this article. Thanks. Doug Weller talk 12:37, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
Would a member of this WikiProject please review Special:Contributions/Calcit12 for edits made to three articles relevant to this WP. The editor has been putting nonsense into articles that I understand so I have to assume that they have done the same to articles I don't. -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 00:41, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
I have left a comment about the way that Template:Hijri month is constructed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Templates#About Template:Hebrew month and Template:Hijri month. If you are interested in the template, please see there. ~Cheers, Ten Ton Parasol 02:09, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
The title of the article on Jumada al-awwal should be changed to Jumada al-Awwal (i.e. 'a' => 'A') to bring it in line with the names of the other months of the Islamic calendar. I know how to edit a WP page but not how to change the title of a WP page. AstroLynx ( talk) 15:36, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
I have started a draft for Tariqah-i-Muhammadiya. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thriley ( talk) 20:55, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
Sâd / 1 Sãd. Öğüt ve uyarı dolu o şerefli Kur’an’a yemin olsun ki, tek kurtuluş yolu İslâm yoludur! 85.108.199.119 ( talk) 14:16, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
Editors are invited to participate at this discussion. TrangaBellam ( talk) 04:32, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
Editors are invited to help establish consensus at Talk:Diplomatic_career_of_Muhammad#Merger_proposal. Felix QW ( talk) 17:58, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
Request for comment on removal of prefix "Islamic" from "Islamic death penalty" | ||
Contested and attempted removal of the prefix "Islamic" from "Islamic death penalty", which is construct used as a pipe for the wikilink Capital punishment in Islam and as phrase remains unreferenced. Please participate in the discussion at Talk:Page Thanks.-- ౪ Santa ౪ 99° 09:41, 16 February 2022 (UTC) |
Kindly fix Qurban (Islamic ritual sacrifice) it seems to have been vandalised. Since I have reverted 3 times in a row, I could not revert it. Kindly have a look at it. And correct it if needed. Thankyou. signed, 511KeV (talk) 17:18, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
Greetings,
Adequate and nuanced overview for even non– Muslim audience is expected out of the articles Muslims and Muslim world. Whether the articles are achieving that purpose adequately? Requesting and expecting proactive participation in providing inputs from non–Muslim audience too along with Muslim users.
Since the article Muslim world is tagged various improvements it can not be submitted to formal review process still I feel the article deserves more inputs for content improvement.
Requesting your visit to the articles
Thanks
Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' ( talk) 06:27, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the 39th most imported script on Wikipedia. The idea is that it takes something like
John Smith "[https://www.deprecated.com/article Article of things]" ''Deprecated.com''. Accessed 2020-02-14.
)and turns it into something like
It will work on a variety of links, including those from {{ cite web}}, {{ cite journal}} and {{ doi}}.
The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.
Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.
This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 16:01, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello. I was wondering if someone in this wikiproject has the interest and time to help reference and redact properly the article Nizari Isma'ilism. Thanks in advance.-- Thinker78 ( talk) 16:15, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Greetings,
Hi, I am User:Bookku, I find information and knowledge gaps, try to recruit article expanding editors and promote drafts articles for further expansion.
Requesting your visit to following drafts / articles and help expand the same if any of these interests you.
Thanks and warm regards
Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' ( talk) 10:33, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
We had no consensus (ever) on which image to use on the template which led to years long series of edit wars. so let's (try to) make this discussion the final say on this old debate.
This is my opinion on the subject:
those who claim that the word
Allah is "inclusive of all Muslims", please provide your proof. All religions with all the sects believe in a God but that doesn't make the calligraphy of the word God a symbol of the said religion! Please support your claims with sources that prove that this word symbolize Islam! Is there any Islamic organizations that use it? No. But many Islamic organizations does use the
crescent and star.
Here's a few examples:
That's why I think the Star and Crescent is the most representative of Islam and I don't think that there's any Islamic sects that is against it and hence why it's the one that should be used in the template. Thank you! Shorouq★The★Super★ninja2 ( talk) 22:32, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
The original content features a source from a islamophic writer whose source still remains I didn’t even remove it all the additional information added is from the sealed nectar a seerah or biography regarding the prophet muhammed life and Hadith sources which are sahih and the views of Islamic scholars regarding in what happened to umm qirfa however certain users like Tolwol and mehmood have reverted this edits based on baseless allegations like whitewashing and being poorly sourced even though they can’t prove it the recent edit by mehmood gives no reason there is a lot of edit warring going on to just look at the edit history I request fresh eyes look at the case from a more neutral source on here who know the Wikipedia rules and are obliged by them here is where the Wikipedia article in question
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banu_Fazara 213.107.1.209 ( talk) 21:33, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
Until it was recently change it said he had been criticised for " and his marriage to Aisha when she was six years old, which according to most estimates was consummated when she was nine." It now reads "and pedophilia for his child marriage to Aisha when she was six years old, which according to most Islamic sources was consummated when Aisha was nine." Doug Weller talk 13:52, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Does anybody still work on the Islam and Controversy task force? I've been making improvements over time to the task force page but I'm not sure if I should remove the non-existent links to project pages. It seems the project was partially abandoned. Pinging GregKaye, it seems you're the last active member from this task force. -- WikiCleanerMan ( talk) 22:40, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
Please comment at Talk:Al-Aqsa Mosque#Requested move 30 May 2022 - we are in need of editors who have the time to review the sources. Our Al-Aqsa Mosque article is about the small building. The large compound, also known as Al-Aqsa Mosque, is our article Temple Mount.
For reference:
Per
WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, what matters most is whether it is highly likely — much more likely than any other single topic, and more likely than all the other topics combined — to be the topic sought when a reader searches for that term
. It is also important to assess how the term is used amongst scholarly sources - an assessment of this has been provided at the discussion, and it would be good to have it confirmed by editors who have the time to review the sources themselves.
Thank you.
Onceinawhile ( talk) 08:39, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
Talk:Muhammad ibn Qasim#Requested move 4 July 2022 could use some input. Thanks, ☿ Apaugasma ( talk ☉) 12:05, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
User:Nutez has nominated Baháʼí Faith for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 22:26, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
There is a requested move at Talk:Fatimah#Requested move 16 July 2022 which may be of interest to members of this project or watchers of its talk page. ☿ Apaugasma ( talk ☉) 13:05, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
Hey there! There's an edit request open on Talk:Muhammad that I would like input on because of the topic and nature of the request. It has been open for over a month without replies, and I am not knowledgeable to accept it. Could someone take a look at it to see if it's good, needs changing, or deniable? Thanks. SWinxy ( talk) 06:06, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
The article on the Abbasid caliph al-Muti has been submitted for Featured Article. All interested editors are invited to participate. Constantine ✍ 18:20, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
AFD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abdul Jabbar Al Rifai needs assistance in evaluating notability. Jahaza ( talk) 01:18, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
Hello, |
Want to add Ibrahim Raza Khan on this project, how can i do this, can anyone tell me. KhanQadriRazvi ( talk) 17:53, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
The page Islamic dietary laws covers most of the key points, but has a retinue of cleanup tags - largely in relation to the particularly bad state of its sourcing. Iskandar323 ( talk) 09:45, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Library now features what appears to be full access to Brill Online, including all of their books, the many top journals published by them, as well as all of their encyclopedic reference works.
For users editing Islam-related articles, this notably includes all versions of the Encyclopaedia of Islam, the Encyclopaedia Islamica, the Encyclopaedia of the Qurʾān, the new fascicles of Encyclopædia Iranica, and much, much more.
Once registered and logged in at WP:LIBRARY, click this link to search their entire database, and this link to select the encyclopedic reference work of your choice. You may want to add those links to the bookmark toolbar in your browser...
Be sure to spread the happy news to other editors who might be interested! ☿ Apaugasma ( talk ☉) 21:20, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
Salams, Deoband Community Wikimedia is a recognized affiliate of Wikimedia and it began with its subjective focus on the global Deobandi scholarship. The affiliate is looking forward to widening its focus to "general Islamic scholarship, Islamic history, Islamic academia etc", something that has remained deeply underrepresented on the encyclopedia. I'd be more than glad to have opinions of interested editors from the WikiProject on the affiliate's Meta page. Regards, ─ The Aafī (talk) 09:59, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
@ Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Islamic bicycle
Bookku ( talk) 11:20, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Wahhabism#Requested move 19 December 2022 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. – robertsky ( talk) 06:39, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
An article that you have been involved in editing— Islamic bicycle—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Chidgk1 ( talk) 07:31, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
Category:Islamic scholars has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you.— Qwerfjkl talk 22:05, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
Which articles are deemed to have blasphemous content leading to Pakistan's current ban on Wikipedia? If they can be identified, it might be possible to review the content.-- Ipigott ( talk) 19:13, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
There is a proposal on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Islam-related articles regarding Islamic honorifics and user-generated calligraphic images which may be of interest. ☿ Apaugasma ( talk ☉) 01:41, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Muslim campaign at Córdoba Cathedral#Requested move 15 February 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ❯❯❯ Raydann (Talk) 21:18, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
I have seen an editor mark several articles as being of "top importance" to this group. Since this editor was marking articles as being of top-importance to every WikiProject, I doubt that this was done correctly. Please consider reviewing Category:Top-importance Islam-related articles and adjusting the contents to reflect this group's preferences. WhatamIdoing ( talk) 02:47, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
Could you help to fix links to the disambuiguation page Hijri calendar. It is generally better for the reader to link to specific articles rather than disambiguation pages and this could be Islamic calendar, Tabular Islamic calendar or Solar Hijri calendar but I do not have the exertise to link to the correct one. A list of the articles including this link is available at Disambig fix list for Hijri calendar. Thanks for any help.— Rod talk 11:05, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Muslim conquest of Spain#Requested move 28 March 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Super Ψ Dro 07:29, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi, I think we need your opinion on the RFD for Islams. Thanks. Lenticel ( talk) 00:10, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Quality assessments by Wikipedia editors rate articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at
Wikipedia:Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent
Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a |class=
parameter to {{
WikiProject banner shell}}, which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.
No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to {{ WikiProject banner shell}}, and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.
However, if your project has decided to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass {{
WPBannerMeta}} a new |QUALITY_CRITERIA=custom
parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present.
Aymatth2 (
talk)
15:57, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
User:DGG has died, but left User:DGG/Arabic-Persian literacy relation in progress. Please see if this content is of use to this project. BD2412 T 17:34, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
You are invited to give an opinion. Panam2014 ( talk) 00:33, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
Please see here for more details: Talk:Afghanistan_conflict_(1978–present)#Should_be_renamed_to_Afghan_Conflict_(1978–present) FOARP ( talk) 08:53, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
If you have an opinion, please join the discussion. Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 16:14, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
...is used in many pages ( Aqidah, Imam, Muslims) for illustrative purposes without any critical analysis. I am not sure it is wise to have a painting from an orientalist painter as that illustration; there is a good chance that it may incorrectly depict some aspects of salah.
Could someone with experience check that the details are correct? In particular the following look suspicious to me (though I know next to nothing about Muslim rites, Sunni or otherwise):
Tigraan Click here for my talk page ("private" contact) 17:28, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
FYI Template:AHM ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs) has been nominated for deletion -- 64.229.90.172 ( talk) 03:58, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
There should be a style guide for articles talking about surahs of the Qur'an. There is some consistency between articles, as most of them contain summaries of the surah (eg. Al-Baqarah) but there are other some sections in some articles about surahs that are not in others. For example, some articles (especially ones about short surahs) contain a section transcribing the text itself (eg. At-Takathur), some contain a section about the mentioning of specific prophets in the surah (eg. Al-Baqarah), and some contain exegesis (eg. Al-Ma'idah). There should be a specific format to follow when writing articles about surahs. For example:
First few paragraphs Summary Text (can be translated) Exegesis etc. Homeostasis39 ( talk) 15:36, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
Could someone more knowledgable take a look at Category:Eid (Islam) and help with the sort keys. Looks sort of odd to have Eid al-Fitr sorted as F, but Eid al-Ghadir sorted as an E. Thank You.18:00, 15 May 2023 (UTC) Naraht ( talk) 18:00, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lake Zamkaft until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
Eastmain ( talk • contribs) 17:13, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
There is sudden change to longstanding redirect to a different article. To understand Wikipedia community opinions, requesting inputs @ Talk:Usama#Request for inputs. Bookku ( talk) 10:11, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
Hello, |
References
Hi there, I'm experimenting new layouts for this project userbox. Do y'all prefer the current version or a new proposal? Let me know your thoughts! Est. 2021 ( talk · contribs) 20:19, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
Hello, User:Sodicadl nominated the article Islam (which I assume is a rather important article for this wikiproject) for GA at Talk:Islam/GA2. I came on as a reviewer way back in January, but I have been unable to dedicate enough time to continue the review and asked for a new reviewer in April. No one has come forward yet, so I'm posting the request here if anyone would like to pick it up. Thanks, Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 21:21, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
There is an ongoing discussion at Talk:Witchcraft#Ridiculous! about changing the content of the lead and core definitions at Witchcraft. As the article has content about practices in Islam, members might want to check it out. - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 18:29, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
I found the page /info/en/?search=Fatwas_of_Barelvi_Muslims during random fixing of uncategorized pages and I suspect it should be merged into /info/en/?search=List_of_fatwas.
I am not the most knowledgeable about Islamic jurisprudence and would greatly appreciate any help that could be given on this matter. AevumNova ( talk) 02:46, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Syed Ahmad Khan#Requested move 11 July 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ModernDayTrilobite ( talk • contribs) 14:28, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
Arab–Byzantine wars has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke ( talk) 16:19, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_January_10#Scholars_of_Islam was closed without consensus. Does someone here have a better idea how to untangle this knot? Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:20, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Mubarak Mosque, Tilford#Requested move 22 July 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. UtherSRG (talk) 18:48, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
I have taken the long overdue step of creating an Al-Aqsa Mosque compound page to encompass the full architectural history of Al-Aqsa all in one place. This was not done previously, with there being separate articles for the Dome of the Rock, Al-Aqsa Mosque and Minarets of the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound, etc., but no single page drawing them all together historically and architecturally. The temple mount page provides some architectural overview, but it is so bound up in narrating the full history of the site and is substructure (so much so that it uses the 'mountain' infobox template, not the 'religious building' one) that it has never done full credit to the actual superstructure. Now there is a page that ties it all together. Iskandar323 ( talk) 09:08, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Protests against Quran desecration in Sweden, which is within the scope of this WikiProject. GnocchiFan ( talk) 17:14, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
As this is a highly active WikiProject, I would like to introduce you to Credibility bot. This is a bot that makes it easier to track source usage across articles through automated reports and alerts. We piloted this approach at Wikipedia:Vaccine safety and we want to offer it to any subject area or domain. We need your support to demonstrate demand for this toolkit. If you have a desire for this functionality, or would like to leave other feedback, please endorse the tool or comment at WP:CREDBOT. Thanks! Harej ( talk) 17:32, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
Hi – this seems like a very promising article on a notable subject. Not new as such, but could do with some copyedits from members of this Wikiproject if anyone is interested. Thanks 😊 GnocchiFan ( talk) 14:35, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
Requesting inputs at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Islamic Bill of Rights for Women in the Mosque (2nd nomination) discussion. - Bookku ( talk) 05:16, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
See Talk:Political Islam#Section Documentation Centre Political Islam violates NPOV Doug Weller talk 15:30, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Arba'een#Requested move 30 August 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. UtherSRG (talk) 11:32, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Muslim period in the Indian subcontinent#Requested move 8 September 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ❯❯❯ Raydann (Talk) 16:04, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
There is a discussion on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Islam-related articles regarding the NPOV usage of "the prophet Muhammad" or "the prophet" which may be of interest to this WikiProject. ☿ Apaugasma ( talk ☉) 18:30, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
There are several repeated sentences/paragraphs in Conversion to Islam. This should be fixed. Kk.urban ( talk) 23:53, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Al-Inshirah#Requested move 10 September 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ❯❯❯ Raydann (Talk) 03:33, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
An editor has started an RfC asking "Should Operation Al-Aqsa Flood by Hamas be included in the List of Islamist terrorist attacks?" at Talk:List of Islamist terrorist attacks#Should Operation Al-Aqsa Flood by Hamas included in the list of Islamist Terrorist attacks?. Interested editors are invited to participate. TarnishedPath talk 09:15, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
Input welcome in merger discussion about the Order of Assassins. Iskandar323 ( talk) 12:52, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
Please see: Talk:Islam and cats#Change Contents in Islam and cats (and the post immediately above it). I'l leery of editing that article in the detail-level requested because I'm not a subject matter expert and don't have a basis on which to evaluate the claims made about the sources in relation to other source material. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 18:16, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
Western Wall has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk) 01:15, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Muslim conquest of Spain#Requested move 5 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 17:11, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Muhammad Khatami#Requested move 6 January 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 01:10, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Re'im music festival massacre#Requested move 6 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 13:02, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Siege of Gaza City#Requested move 6 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 19:28, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Holit massacre#Requested move 10 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 06:32, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Nir Yitzhak massacre#Requested move 10 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 06:37, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Mu'tazilism#Requested move 10 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 20:00, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Nasheed#Requested move 11 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 01:06, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Houthi involvement in the Israel–Hamas war#Requested move 12 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 10:17, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
Please provide your opinions and comments at Talk:Banu_Fazara#RfC on Umm Qirfa that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. 2A00:801:707:AFAE:FC02:57DA:9BB7:8E6E ( talk) 23:15, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
Hi everyone - just letting this WikiProject know that a Peer Review of LGBT in the Ottoman Empire (with the intention of improving this to Good Article status) is currently under way. If anyone has anything to add to the article / review, it would be greatly appreciated. Thank you! GnocchiFan ( talk) 17:19, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
Dear all, I work at the University of Edinburgh as Wikimedian in Residence and am currently supporting students on a 55-80hr volunteering project where they choose a topic they would like to research from October to (end of) March and where their research and writing would help help improve their studies and also the topic coverage on Wikipedia. One student has chosen as their focus: Islamic history and culture. Within this, they have February and March left to work on their project and they have decided they would like to spend 50hrs researching and writing pages covering the 50 names of God in Islam. A couple of example pages have already been written:
They are keen to continue on the same trajectory as they find the research rewarding and believe Wikipedia readers will too. My only concern is that the two examples are quite quote-heavy as things stand and that 50 individual pages might not be welcome in terms of 'bloating' Wikipedia or that it might not be academically challenging to write 50 similar articles or that it might just be better covered in one condensed summary page on Wikipedia (something one of Islamic Art lecturers also confessed might be more appropriate for an encyclopedia). The argument put forward is that Arabic Wikipedia and Kazakh Wikipedia already have versions of the pages linked above so why not English Wikipedia too. I just thought I'd check what the consensus view might be before they proceed further. I do not want to dismiss the project or 'gatekeep' in any way but thought I'd check what the view of WikiProject Islam editors might be before we progressed or if you might have alternative suggestions for a project focus given Islamic history and culture covers a vast swathe of potential topic areas if this current idea is not viable. Any thoughts do let me know and I'll pass on to the student accordingly. Thanks! Stinglehammer ( talk) 18:15, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
And by that I mean all projects that are related to Islam in Wikipedia ( Template:Islam, Portal:Islam and WikiProject Islam) We need to use a unified icon for all of them.
And I think we should be using the crescent and star, because it doesn't matter if it was related with The Ottoman Empire, Greeks or any other nation, it is now the most popular icon for Islam in both Islamic countries AND especially across non-Muslim people to refer to Islam. And people of non-Muslim backgrounds and those who can't read Arabic or still learning it and the ones who are not familiar with Arabic alphabet and calligraphy would have it difficult for them to know that this word is Allah and it means God in Arabic and in this context it refers to the Muslim God only (although it used by all religions in the Arab World) and then realize that this article is about Islam. So, whether that this icon was popularized by Ottomans or not it is now the most recognizable icon for Islam across all nations. And moreover
some researchers say that it wasn't popularized by the Ottomans: How the quarter-crescent moon came to symbolize Islam is uncertain. Many explanations with varying degrees of plausibility have been offered. Among the most popular is the assertion that the symbol signifies the position ofthemoon and the planetVenus at dawn on 23 July 610 A.D., when the Prophet Mohammed received his initial revelation from God.
Cyril Glassé in his The New Encyclopedia of Islam (2001 edition, s.v. "Moon") states that "in the language of conventional symbols, the crescent and star have become the symbols of Islam as much as the cross is the symbol of Christianity." [1]
The word Allah simply means God in Arabic and it predates Islam. Those who claim that the word Allah is "inclusive of all Muslims", please provide your proof. All religions with all the sects believe in a God but that doesn't make the calligraphy of the word God a symbol of the said religion! Please support your claims with sources that prove that this word symbolize Islam! Is there any Islamic organizations that use it? No. But many Islamic organizations does use the crescent and star. Here's a few examples:
List of examples
|
---|
|
That's why I think the Star and Crescent is the most representative of Islam and I don't think that there's any Islamic sects that is against it and hence why it's the one that should be used. Thank you! ☆SuperNinja2☆ 12:16, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
And why we need a unified icon
Star and crescent do not represent any religion as a whole.
Also, In the English language, the word Allah generally refers to God in Islam.
Star and crescent can be symbol of a organization or as design of mosque.
Various calligraphies including calligraphy of the word Allah are also used in the mosque. So reason is not valid.
This can't be a reason to change all different images to one
According to who? Provide your sources: Burden of proof is on you, you are making claim that Star and crescent is related to Islam.
Allah is Arabic word, not English: I know, but it is English Wikipedia, even though ar:Template:Islam also use calligraphy of the word Allah.
did not provide a single reason to make Allah more reasonable to be used: I am against Star and crescent image, for other image we can also discuss, but if not Star and crescent then default is File:Allah3.svg
Burden of proof is on you, you are making claim that Star and crescent is related to Islam.
for other image we can also discussis not reasonable. So, why are you objecting the use of the crescent and star if you don't have a better alternative? How are we supposed to know that the said alternative is better than the crescent and star if we postpone the discussion if it? That is not rational. I already provided reliable sources and academic studies and researches but it's now clear enough for me that you didn't bother reading my argument. What a pity!
even though ar:Template:Islam also use calligraphy of the word Allah
And you haven't provide any Islamic sources which claim that Star and crescent is related to Islam.
that means it is used in Arabic context: What? See calligraphy of the word Allah as symbol or icon. To become familiar with the icon you need to know what it is.
you don't have a better alternative: I do have, leave it as it is.
it look more like a Original research
none of the cited sources are reliable except one
See calligraphy of the word Allah as symbol or icon. To become familiar with the icon you need to know what it is.
The crescent and star feature in the flags of many Islamic countries which were formerly part of the Ottoman Empire
The image you propose represent Ottoman Empire and Pakistan more than Islam.
Brandon University: [5] This article is about work on Stained Glass
Yale University: [6] states- certainly not in uniform use among Muslims
The crescent and star feature in the flags of many Islamic countries which were formerly part of the Ottoman Empire. Thus, in the language of conventional symbols, the crescent and star have become the symbols of Islam.
I do have, leave it as it is.
If a country's flag is used it does not mean that it represents any religion.
Do you know that is written on image of Template:Chinese Buddhism, but still it represent the religion.
I don't know much about Buddhism, so I can't give my opinion on this subject: Neither about Islam. It's not whataboutery, it's about Wikipedia consensus and common rule across site.
sectarian nature of religion...This may be a reason we should not impose a unified symbol across Wikipedia. This point regarding the unified symbol should be discussed first in any comments supporting this change. Why do we need it?
Isaac has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Spinixster (chat!) 10:03, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
@ JorgeLaArdilla, QalasQalas, Idell, TheAafi, TheEagle107, Captain Assassin!, Wiki id2, Sa.vakilian, Ed Poor, Alarob, Imagine Wizard, Masum Ibn Musa, Resnjari, Ahendra, and Super ninja2:@ Cplakidas, Chongkian, Ratekreel, Ulubatli Hasan, Melofors, Hamza Ali Shah, MartinPoulter, GoldenBootWizard276, AvDahan, Ammarpad, Farhoudk, Svest~enwiki, Zereshk, LatinoMuslim, SFGiants, Chaos, Sulaimandaud, Zakksez, Absar, Darz kkg, Euryalus, AA, Leroy65X, Doc sameer, Peter Deer, Nafsadh, Razimantv Alt, Nasiryounus, Nawabmalhi, Masssly, Samee, MezzoMezzo, Arteyu, Owais Khursheed, Em-mustapha, Naila Khan, City of Silver, Johnbod, and Coalcity58: Can we arrange a Ramadan editathon to edit create, elaborate, correct, and translate Islamic articles? Arabic wikipedia is arranging it for 3 years 1, 2 and Bengali wikipedia for 5 years. So why not the English wikipedia? 202.134.9.145 ( talk) 17:54, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
@ Ahendra, Sa.vakilian, Peaceray, Bduke, Steelpillow, Gog the Mild, 4meter4, GELongstreet, Utfor, Invasive Spices, Rytyho usa, Faendalimas, StarTrekker, Vanisaac, and Emir of Wikipedia:@ JorgeLaArdilla, QalasQalas, Idell, TheAafi, TheEagle107, Captain Assassin!, Wiki id2, Sa.vakilian, Ed Poor, Alarob, Imagine Wizard, Masum Ibn Musa, Resnjari, Ahendra, and Super ninja2:@ Cplakidas, Chongkian, Ratekreel, Ulubatli Hasan, Melofors, Hamza Ali Shah, MartinPoulter, GoldenBootWizard276, AvDahan, Ammarpad, Farhoudk, Svest~enwiki, Zereshk, LatinoMuslim, SFGiants, Chaos, Sulaimandaud, Zakksez, Absar, Darz kkg, Euryalus, AA, Leroy65X, Doc sameer, Peter Deer, Nafsadh, Razimantv Alt, Nasiryounus, Nawabmalhi, Masssly, Samee, MezzoMezzo, Arteyu, Owais Khursheed, Em-mustapha, Naila Khan, City of Silver, Johnbod, and Coalcity58: Please look over the last discussions about anti-Salafi edits in Talk:Sexuality in Islam. 202.134.9.145 ( talk) 18:58, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
An article in the scope of this Wikiproject is currently up for Featured Article review. Input is welcomed to decide if this article is worthy of the FA rating. MartinPoulter ( talk) 19:25, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Briefly, the dispute described
here is
1) whether this statement should be allowed in the lede
2) whether revivalist preacher
Abul A'la Maududi should be included along with two other scholars listed who support this position (i.e. belief in Jinn is a necessary part of Islam).
3) and whether as evidence of the significance of this belief, a brief description of the troubles of
Nasr Abu Zayd "who was
threated with death for apostasy" in the 1990s "(in part) because he didn't believe in jinn", should be included in the article. --
Louis P. Boog (
talk) 18:14, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
Louis P. Boog (
talk)
18:14, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
References
User Manticore had repeatedly deleted sentences about Muslim growth projection in the past and in the futures based on Pew Research estimation. He obviously using different reason. Firstly he claimed it was of topic, then he claimed it was poorly written (it could targetted Non English speaker contributors) and he also claimed it was crystal ball which denied in wikipedia (but Pew Research estimation based on science not crystal ball and many wiki articles used it as sources). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.140.166.103 ( talk) 13:11, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
According to the discussion above:
☆SuperNinja2☆ 16:29, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
Crusading movement has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Borsoka ( talk) 11:28, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:2024 Iranian Strikes in Israel#Requested move 13 April 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. RodRabelo7 ( talk) 21:31, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:2024 Iranian strikes in Israel#Requested move 14 April 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. RodRabelo7 ( talk) 19:34, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion concerning the question of religion and whether or not it is an appropriate subject for the Fringe Theories Noticeboard. Experienced editors are encouraged to join the conversation. - Ad Orientem ( talk) 19:51, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Biblical and Quranic narratives#Requested move 7 April 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ❯❯❯ Raydann (Talk) 17:26, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
Couple of week back @ Louis P. Boog had made brief input request on this discussion board but may be users missed during busy schedules last some weeks.
As a discussion facilitator I feel more inputs at Talk:Jinn would be helpful in the on going WP:Due discussions. Pl. do not give inputs here but at Talk:Jinn only.
Bookku ( talk) 02:16, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Since I posted the above notice about the Featured Article Candidacy of Empire of the Sultans, there has been more interest and the review process has progressed further, which I'm very grateful for. We still need more reviewers to take part, following the instructions at Wikipedia:FACSUPPORTOPPOSE. A great deal of work has gone into both the article and the review; this is a chance to make a community decision on the results. Thanks in advance for any help! MartinPoulter ( talk) 13:22, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
Your input would be appreciated at Talk:Abu Lu'lu'a Firuz#Sources for the name Piruz Nahavandi. Summaries of the dispute and discussion thread may be found here. Thanks! ☿ Apaugasma ( talk ☉) 15:20, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Grand Mosque of Erzurum#Requested move 4 May 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Wikiexplorationandhelping ( talk) 13:08, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
also Pre-RfC stage info:
|
---|
As a discussion facilitator fyi a WP:DUE discussion (some aspects may touch WP:Fringe) is at Talk:Jinn#Pre-RfC stage's WP:RSN#Hachette Livre and WP:ORN step. After RSN and WP:ORN step, RfC formatting is likely to be discussed at Talk:Jinn#Pre-RfC in a new sub section. |
Bookku ( talk) 04:56, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
An RFC is in progress at Talk:Rafida#RFC_on_Rejection_of_Truth_in_Lede. Your participation is requested. Robert McClenon ( talk) 05:44, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
This page 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. |
Assalamo alaikum, I am trying to complete one article on Indian Islamic Culture center located at New Delhi. Could you please take a look on this article and contribute more on this to get it approved on Wikipedia. thanks you Rashid Jorvee ( talk) 10:41, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
Walaikum salam - Looks like your article was declined. you may want to look into it. All the best! Mitsurugi78 ( talk) 23:01, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
A user has been going around linking occurrences of "non-Muslim" to Kafir. [1] That seems ill advised as kufr has more to do with theology and kafir is at present considered a pejorative. What do others think? VR talk 14:07, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
FYI: Template talk:Islam#Image again. -- HyperGaruda ( talk) 07:10, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
Hi all, I've boldly updated your project's peer review page ( Wikipedia:WikiProject Islam/Peer review) by updating the instructions and archiving old reviews.
The new instructions use Wikipedia's general peer review process ( WP:PR) to list peer reviews. Your project's reviews are still able to be listed on your local page too.
The benefits of this change is that review requests will get seen by a wider audience and are likely to be attended to in a more timely way (many WikiProject peer reviews remain unanswered after years). The Wikipedia peer review process is also more maintained than most WikiProjects, and this may help save time for your active members.
I've done this boldly as it seems your peer review page is pretty inactive and I am working through around 90 such similar peer review pages. Please feel free to discuss below - please ping me ({{ u|Tom (LT)}}) in your response.
Cheers and hope you are well, Tom (LT) ( talk) 23:07, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
Template:Rashidun princes and princesses has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Alivardi (talk) 16:59, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Superstitions in Muslim societies is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Superstitions in Muslim societies until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Bookku ( talk) 05:23, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
If I go through the madhhabs named in the Amman Message, we have articles at the single-word titles Hanafi, Maliki, Hanbali, Zaidiyyah, and Zahiri. We also have articles on the other three, at Shafi'i school, Ja'fari jurisprudence and Ibadi Islam.
For the sake of consistency, I feel it would be better to move the last three articles to single-word titles Shafi'i, Ja'fari, and Ibadi. I will post pointers at the talk pages shortly.
While I am fairly clueless about the subject, reading the articles, at least Shafi'i and Ja'fari articles seem pretty parallel to the Hanafi etc. ones - dealing mostly with a view on the interpretation of law and how it came about. The Ibadi article mostly is, too, although it contains some significant historical/demographic information so arguably it should not be lumped together.
Any thoughts? If the Amman message is somehow controversial and other schools ought to be included in the debate, please educate me. Tigraan Click here to contact me 16:58, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
Salam, greetings, Can French speakers translate this article ( Anti-Capitalist Muslims) to english? Thanks. Signed, ~𝓐𝓭𝓲𝓰𝓪𝓫𝓻𝓮𝓴 𝓽𝓱𝓮 𝓕𝓲𝓻𝓼𝓽~ Contact 18:47, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
Right now google is showing mirza maroof ahmed as caliphate of islam on wikpedia.which is totally wrong and biased.it should be immediately removed.The 29-year rule of the Rashidun was Islam’s first experience without the leadership of the Prophet Muhammad. His example, however, in both private and public life, came to be regarded as the norm (Sunnah) for his successors, and a large and influential body of anṣār (companions of the Prophet) kept close watch on the caliphs to ensure their strict adherence to divine revelation (the Qurʾān) and the Sunnah. The Rashidun thus assumed all of Muhammad’s duties except the prophetic: as imams, they led the congregation in prayer at the mosque; as khaṭībs, they delivered the Friday sermons; and as umarāʾ al-muʾminīn (“commanders of the faithful”), they commanded the army.
The caliphate of the Rashidun, in which virtually all actions had religious import, began with the wars of the riddah (“apostasy”; 632–633), tribal uprisings in Arabia, and ended with the first Muslim civil war (fitnah; 656–661). It effected the expansion of the Islamic state beyond Arabia into Iraq, Syria, Palestine, Egypt, Iran, and Armenia and, with it, the development of an elite class of Arab soldiers. The Rashidun were also responsible for the adoption of an Islamic calendar, dating from Muhammad’s emigration (Hijrah) from Mecca to Medina (622), and the establishment of an authoritative reading of the Qurʾān, which strengthened the Muslim community and encouraged religious scholarship. [1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Malikawan123 ( talk • contribs) 08:00, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello, I've created my first page for Nasheed singer Ismail Hussain Ismail_Hussain_Singer. Need your valueble suggestions and support to keep it alive on Wikipedia. Thanks— Preceding unsigned comment added by LwdBell ( talk • contribs) — Preceding undated comment added 13:37, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
I've collected some articles with Islam-related links to DAB pages, where expert attention would be welcome. Search for "disam" in read mode and for "{{d" in edit mode; and if you solve any of these puzzles, remove the {{ dn}} tag and post {{ done}} here.
Thanks in advance, Narky Blert ( talk) 18:05, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
JorgeLaArdilla has been making edits to the articles on the Suras of the Quran (example: [4], but there are many similar edits in his recent contribution in other sura articles), that I'd like the community's opinion on. I think adding a list-style content when there is already an existing prose that covers the same purpose is discouraged per MOS:PROSE, plus the list that was added was attributed to one interpreter only (George Sale from the 18th century) which seems inappropriate per WP:WEIGHT. Other than these I don't think the edits were an improvements to the article, but wondering what others here think. I tried to revert but the author restored them saying "Dont remove referenced content" without addressing the reasoning in my edit summary. This kind of interaction has happened before with this editor too. HaEr48 ( talk) 20:31, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
For Surah summaries a good source is "The Clear Quran" by Dr. Mustafa Khattab. Might be a good source to check out for those interested. Mitsurugi78 ( talk) — Preceding undated comment added 15:25, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
I have come across the "Summary of Holy Quran: An Ultimate Guide Series" by Muhammad Farooq and Nagina Kanwal. It seems like a pretty good summary of each surah in the Quran based on my reading. It's not very verbose like a classical tafsir collection but it definitely covers the main points at a very high level. KuroNekoNiyah ( talk) 02:11, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
You've done a lot of hard work. I say it to @ Onel5969: - thank you! It has been a pleasure for me but I guess a chore for you. Didn't think about it before. Also
making redirects for Quranic verses (e.g. Q37:35). Instead of that I think it is better to externally link
The article Criticism of Muhammad is a WP:POVFORK as it currently only covers the Prophet Muhammad in a negative light. Wikipedia:Content_forking#Point_of_view_(POV)_forks says,
Any daughter article that deals with opinions about the subject of parent article must include suitably-weighted positive and negative opinions, and/or rebuttals, if available, and the original article should contain a neutral summary of the split article. There is currently no consensus whether a "Criticism of..." article is always a POV fork, but many criticism articles nevertheless suffer from POV problems. If possible, refrain from using "criticism" and instead use neutral terms such as "perception" or "reception"; if the word "criticism" must be used, make sure that such criticism considers both the merits and faults, and is not entirely negative.
There are sources that praise Muhammad and excluding that point of view violates neutrality. There have been discussions at Talk:Criticism_of_Muhammad#Praises_of_the_Prophet_Muhammad and Talk:Criticism_of_Muhammad#Responses_to_'criticism'. Alternative names proposed include:
Pinging for feedback the editors involved in that article's discussion page: @ Anachronist: @ A.889: @ Wakemeup38: @ Sa.vakilian: @ Ghazaalch: @ Maplecreek1: @ Cleopatran Apocalypse: Bless ( talk) 03:55, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
I kindly ask you to take a look at the draft Sujud Tilawa and make the necessary improvements and corrections. Cordially.
-- Kalimoun ( talk) 11:02, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
There is an ongoing discussion above about chaning the name of the article about "Re-education camps" in Xinjiang to another name such as "Internment Camp" or "Concentratin Camp". You are welcome to participate. // Timothy :: t | c | a 07:56, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
I've opened a page move discussion in regards to changing
Shia Islam to
Shi'ism. Feel free to give your imput.
Alivardi
(talk)
14:18, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
Talk:Uyghur genocide#I suggest adding a new section, as people start to question the truthfulness of the "Uyghur genocide" The thread name above is self explanitory. // Timothy :: talk 09:49, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Moorish Castle#Requested move 23 January 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vpab15 ( talk) 19:41, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
I have started a draft on As-Sirah an-Nabawiyyah by Ibn Hisham. I could use some feedback on improving the article. KuroNekoNiyah ( talk) 03:07, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello. I am working on Fatimah bint Asad. Could you please name some other reliable sources I could use improving this article? Thanks. Ghazaalch ( talk) 03:50, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
This stub has been tagged for several issues for over ten years! Bearian ( talk) 20:46, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
Hello,
So the Wahhabism page has been locked for the next 3 days due to edit warring. When I looked over the edit history, significant edits have been made that either point to a problem with how the article was previously or how the article looks now. Hoping some editors with knowledge of the topic might have some time to take a look and see which way is up. I can wade through sources but don't really have a framework to properly evaluate. Slywriter ( talk) 21:41, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2021 March 6 § File:Manqabat-e-Qari Muslehuddin.jpg. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 03:11, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
There’s a new user at Legal system of Saudi Arabia that’s made this change x3 both as an IP and under their new account. There is a POV there but I can’t actually figure out what it is - there’s a talk page discusion I’ve been having with them but I’m none the wiser what they’re up to. Their edits are a mixture of being unsourced and against the inline citations, poor English or just don’t make sense, or using as a source a website called sharialaw.org which looks non-RS/SELFPUB. The issue itself revolves (I think) around what will be quite an obscure topic for most people: whether Saudi Arabia uses Hanbali, one of four Islamic (Sunni) legal schools of thought (known as Maddhab), in its law courts or whether it should be described as Wahhabism which is certainly the dominant religious movement in the country. I’ve not seen any sources that say Saudi’s law courts don’t follow Hanbali. It’s a low traffic article and on obscure topic hence I’m trying to get other inputs. That’s a bit of a long shot I know but if anyone one is inclined, please take a look. (I’ll post this at a couple of other Wikiprojects). DeCausa ( talk) 09:09, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
Sunni view of Ali ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). This article has long been neglected. Bashir Iran ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has been edit warring with an IP to include content. I redirected the article to the relevant section on the main Ali article, but Bashir reverted me. Bashir has been adding unreliable content to other articles (more specifically claiming that mammoths were mentioned in the Shahnameh without any sourcing which is ludicrous), but I don't know enough about Islam to evaluate the content in the article, so I hope somone more familiar with the topic can take a look. Cheers. Hemiauchenia ( talk) 00:02, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi WikiProject Islam, I've been working on the Xinjiang papers article. Please feel free to make edits or provide feedback on how I can raise my article rating. I'm new to Wikipedia editing and still trying to learn! Thanks. Couchcupcross ( talk) 12:56, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
Ilhan Omar has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. — Sangdeboeuf ( talk) 01:33, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
Islam, that wish to enforce what they see as a distinction in the sexes, as well as the prohibition of women revealing the contour legs, requiring all women and young girls to wear a long dress or skirt rather than trousers
this is wrong! I live in Central Asia and traditional islamic dress code is required to wear long trousers under a long dress or skirt ( Idot ( talk) 16:01, 14 June 2021 (UTC))
Basically, finding the right hadith from the hadith references seem to be an issue from time to time because various publishers and authenticators will use different numbering and different order of the chapters even though there are standards for hadith referencing. For example, one might use Sahih Muslim xyz and another might use abc but abc will typically be a number close to xyz. This leads to the references present being practically invalid in the exemplary use case (that is, if someone uses one publisher instead of the other). So, while one can find the hadith by making an effort, it is often very time consuming. Finding a referenced hadith can also become a hassle especially if the cited webpage where the hadith was supposed to be is now dead.
This issue may be avoided by changing the style of the references. Basically, even though the overall hadith number may vary, the relative number typically doesn't - as in, the hadith will still have the same serial of the same chapter. Therefore, if we use the name of the chapter and the serial number of the hadith in that chapter - then the hadith will be the easiest to find even if the overall number and the order of the chapters and thus, the chapter number varies. This will work well in translation as well since the meaning of the book headings in translation remain similar. Should/can this be implemented? - Sultan.abdullah.hindi ( talk) 19:30, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
Dear JorgeLaArdilla, I think those references (in this case, inside the quotation system) are non-functional and thus, make very good examples of my point. For the first, we could instead add details to the reference in order to indicate the book (section) in Sahih Muslim that it is taken from - as in, to add the details that the relevant hadith is Hadith 13 of Book 38, The Book of Manners and Etiquette. I prefer to present that as: Book 38 (Manners and Etiquette), Hadith 13. This is added inside the reference so as to prevent clutter. In the case of the reference from Ibn Kathir, which isn't a book of hadith but rather a book of Qur'anic exegesis, it isn't as necessary because 19:28 seems to be a verse reference in the Qur'an which is completely standardized and not subject to change and someone can just look it up in the contents section of the book. I think that the references to the Qur'an can also be improved by including the name of the Surah as well but it isn't strictly necessary to begin with and definitely not as necessary as the improvement to the hadith references. - Sultan.abdullah.hindi ( talk) 06:41, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
Um... I'm sorry, nope. Sahih Muslim 2135 was better and that's not exactly what I'm talking about actually. Also, this could be confused by some with Qur'an references which is not a good thing either. What I'm talking about are ref tags referring back to the source.
This is what I'm suggesting be used: <ref>{{Cite web|title=Sahih Muslim 169e|url=https://sunnah.com/muslim/54/123|website=sunnah.com|access-date=17 June 2021}}; In-book reference: Book 54 (Tribulations and Portents of the Last Hour), Hadith 123; Reference: Sahih Muslim 169e</ref>
Instead of: <ref>{{Cite web|title=Sahih Muslim 169e|url=https://sunnah.com/muslim/54/123|website=sunnah.com|access-date=17 June 2021}}; In-book reference: Book 54, Hadith 123; Reference: Sahih Muslim 169e</ref>
Hope that helps -
Sultan.abdullah.hindi (
talk)
13:19, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
That's a relief! Appreciate it, JorgeLaArdilla. I was worried that I might be going against some guidelines. - Sultan.abdullah.hindi ( talk) 19:10, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
As-salamu 'Alaikum wa rahmatullah
In the article Iblis, an editor is presenting his own understanding (as checked from his/her user page) as a valid interpretation in the Interpretations section of the article. S/he also chose to put that interpretation at the top of the list. This understanding is that Iblis is a fallen angel and it seems to be based on a book (Les 100 mots du Coran) by an anthropologist named Malek Chebel who also seems to have a modernist-reformist view of Islam. This does not represent the mainstream position of the Sunni Orthodoxy and this should be clarified in order to avoid misrepresentation of the Sunni Orthodoxy and to not confuse the audience of Wikipedia, esp. because Wikipedia is one of the most widely used online encyclopaedia dispensing information to millions of people of varying ages and educational backgrounds. There are clear restrictions and limitations on what can be represented as the beliefs of the Sunni Orthodoxy. Someone entirely disconnected from the academic tradition of the Sunni Orthodoxy will clearly not understand this and carry on the works of the Orientalists by presenting the opinion of any Fulan and Allan as a position held by the Muslims. One glaring example of this is the matter of camel urine. Just because some Muslim dudes who are ignorant hold a certain position does not mean that it is an accepted position in the Sunni academia. Any help is appreciated. - Sultan.abdullah.hindi ( talk) 17:01, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
some scholars suspect that it could be a mistake of some narrators? Who are the scholars who say that this could be a mistake? VR talk 00:27, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
A requested move discussion has been initiated for Omar to be moved to Umar. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. ☿ Apaugasma ( talk ☉) 15:27, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
Dear Wikipedia editors, I've noticed that some orientalists have been mentioned under the title of " Islamic scholars" in Wikipeida. It's beyond argument that orientalism and Islamic jurisprudence approaches to this issue from opposite views. Non of us would debate on their essential differences and even rivalry in terms of starting point and acquis. As far as I can see, this mistake is not compatible with Wikipedia's principles. Sincerely Ass Prof V. Selcuk Engin
{{
cite web}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link) CS1 maint: url-status (
link): 8:20 @ Sultan.abdullah.hindi: How would you suggest Bayard Dodge is described? JorgeLaArdilla ( talk) 20:00, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Abdul Hakeem Azhari#Requested move 1 September 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ASUKITE 02:45, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Khadija bint Khuwaylid/Archive 1#Requested move 30 August 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ASUKITE 02:56, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Battle of Marawi#Requested move 10 September 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. — hueman1 ( talk • contributions) 09:02, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant#Requested move 30 August 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. VR talk 18:36, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
The 114 articles about 114 surahs in the Quran are some of the worst POV-filled articles in the encyclopedia and the present status of sourcing is almost never compliant with WP:HISTRS. I will be trimming all the articles, leaving only the lead and properly sourced parts. If you have objections, please note. TrangaBellam ( talk) 17:15, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
This new user who went against the last stable version after a month of no new accusations and said it was unreliable or unsensible he gave no proof that the sources are unreliable he played the same trick ratna played previously and stop me from editing by having the wikipedia page protected and even after lengthy talks in the talk page with a admin c.fred and ratnahattin not even ratnahastin could prove these sources given in my version were unreliable so why has my edit been reverted and page protected so I can't revert it?
My version was stable for a month before this new user and vandal TolWol56 came he reverted to ratnahastins version which the second part ratna wrote wasnt even concerning her which had been addressed. Shouldnt his removal of my text be a consensus before its done?
Tolwol56 plays the same tactics as ratna and accuse me of another user exil who reverted his edits I am not exil but if he keeps playing this game I can accuse him to be ratna is he so eager to use his version and same accusation?
His new accusations is that the sources I used are from taha publications again ratna made this accusation but didnt explain which one.
Even if it did taha publication has been around for forty years I dont see how they are unreliable as a publishing site?
https://www.tahapublishers.com/about-us/
So can anyone deal with this here is the talk page /info/en/?search=Talk:Umm_Qirfa here is my edit whicvh was reverted after a month long period of no new accusation:
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Umm_Qirfa&oldid=1044995801
Template:Unsigned IP -->— Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.40.187.96 (talk) 00:05, 23 Sep 2021 (UTC)
On Wikidata we have recently gotten a property for madhhab (P9929). Currently the only allowed values are Hanafi, Hanbalism, Malikism, Shafi`i, Isma'ilism, Ja'fari, Zaidiyyah, Ibadi, Ẓāhirī and Al-Mawardi
Does the members of WikiProject Islam have any suggestions for improvements? Which value do you think should be allowed and not allowed? King regards-- Trade ( talk) 23:13, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
Islam in Finland, which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. WikiDan61 ChatMe! ReadMe!! 12:39, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
A Peer review request has been made for article Islamic marriage contract to receive a broader perspective on how it may be improved.
Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' ( talk) 09:58, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Tafsir ibn Kathir#Requested move 7 October 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. VR talk 20:32, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
Assalamu alaikum, can some one please check the controversy part of the Islamic Society of Baltimore. Seems like they have omitted a couple of information in the sources they had given. I think it needs to be edited thoroughly. Particularly the edits by Tim [ history)] I reverted those but on closer inspection i think the wording have been biased. for example i mentioned in his talk page that
Can some one help me out as i am still a new editor. Thanks -- LostCitrationHunter ( talk) 17:23, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Islamic studies by author (non-Muslim or academic)#Requested move 10 November 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. VR talk 15:07, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
Assalamu Alaikum. i think the Historical department need more attention. Ahendra ( talk) 13:49, 6 November 2021 (UTC)
Anyway, i personally think Battle of Zhu Qissa should be renamed to Dhu Qissa. Ahendra ( talk) 12:52, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Congregational mosque#Requested move 22 November 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. VR talk 15:43, 22 November 2021 (UTC)
Greetings,
Once in a while I browse topic of Islamic literature to find sources for Islamic advice literature and many times I came across topic of fatalism in Islam and reasonable number of scholarly sources seem to be available. Up til now I have been bypassing the topic and keeping away from mind partially for already too many encyclopedic tasks on hand, and again I did not want to engage in more content dispute issues for a low priority article for me. But still number of times those scholarly work cross me can't think of not covering at all.
Presently en WP has following kind of articles
Requesting inputs which way to give coverage to the topic of 'Fatalism in Islamic world'. Should we start a Draft:Fatalism in Islamic world then decide to keep it separate or merge etc. How to go about it ?
Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' ( talk) 09:13, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
Hello, WikiProject Islam,
I came across this article because the editor keeps moving it around from main space to Draft space and back again. I'm hoping that editors well-versed in Islam could look it over. It seems like it is in pretty bad shape to me but perhaps this individual is notable. I went to post this same message at WikiProject Bangladesh but there is no activity on the talk page so it looks inactive. Thanks for any help you can offer. Liz Read! Talk! 01:41, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Sultan Ahmed Mosque#Requested move 30 November 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. VR talk 13:15, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Musaylimah#Requested move 2 December 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. I hope that you will comment there. Thank you.-- John Cline ( talk) 12:00, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
The ones in this article. Thanks. Doug Weller talk 12:37, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
Would a member of this WikiProject please review Special:Contributions/Calcit12 for edits made to three articles relevant to this WP. The editor has been putting nonsense into articles that I understand so I have to assume that they have done the same to articles I don't. -- John Maynard Friedman ( talk) 00:41, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
I have left a comment about the way that Template:Hijri month is constructed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Templates#About Template:Hebrew month and Template:Hijri month. If you are interested in the template, please see there. ~Cheers, Ten Ton Parasol 02:09, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
The title of the article on Jumada al-awwal should be changed to Jumada al-Awwal (i.e. 'a' => 'A') to bring it in line with the names of the other months of the Islamic calendar. I know how to edit a WP page but not how to change the title of a WP page. AstroLynx ( talk) 15:36, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
I have started a draft for Tariqah-i-Muhammadiya. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thriley ( talk) 20:55, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
Sâd / 1 Sãd. Öğüt ve uyarı dolu o şerefli Kur’an’a yemin olsun ki, tek kurtuluş yolu İslâm yoludur! 85.108.199.119 ( talk) 14:16, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
Editors are invited to participate at this discussion. TrangaBellam ( talk) 04:32, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
Editors are invited to help establish consensus at Talk:Diplomatic_career_of_Muhammad#Merger_proposal. Felix QW ( talk) 17:58, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
Request for comment on removal of prefix "Islamic" from "Islamic death penalty" | ||
Contested and attempted removal of the prefix "Islamic" from "Islamic death penalty", which is construct used as a pipe for the wikilink Capital punishment in Islam and as phrase remains unreferenced. Please participate in the discussion at Talk:Page Thanks.-- ౪ Santa ౪ 99° 09:41, 16 February 2022 (UTC) |
Kindly fix Qurban (Islamic ritual sacrifice) it seems to have been vandalised. Since I have reverted 3 times in a row, I could not revert it. Kindly have a look at it. And correct it if needed. Thankyou. signed, 511KeV (talk) 17:18, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
Greetings,
Adequate and nuanced overview for even non– Muslim audience is expected out of the articles Muslims and Muslim world. Whether the articles are achieving that purpose adequately? Requesting and expecting proactive participation in providing inputs from non–Muslim audience too along with Muslim users.
Since the article Muslim world is tagged various improvements it can not be submitted to formal review process still I feel the article deserves more inputs for content improvement.
Requesting your visit to the articles
Thanks
Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' ( talk) 06:27, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the 39th most imported script on Wikipedia. The idea is that it takes something like
John Smith "[https://www.deprecated.com/article Article of things]" ''Deprecated.com''. Accessed 2020-02-14.
)and turns it into something like
It will work on a variety of links, including those from {{ cite web}}, {{ cite journal}} and {{ doi}}.
The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.
Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.
This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 16:01, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello. I was wondering if someone in this wikiproject has the interest and time to help reference and redact properly the article Nizari Isma'ilism. Thanks in advance.-- Thinker78 ( talk) 16:15, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Greetings,
Hi, I am User:Bookku, I find information and knowledge gaps, try to recruit article expanding editors and promote drafts articles for further expansion.
Requesting your visit to following drafts / articles and help expand the same if any of these interests you.
Thanks and warm regards
Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' ( talk) 10:33, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
We had no consensus (ever) on which image to use on the template which led to years long series of edit wars. so let's (try to) make this discussion the final say on this old debate.
This is my opinion on the subject:
those who claim that the word
Allah is "inclusive of all Muslims", please provide your proof. All religions with all the sects believe in a God but that doesn't make the calligraphy of the word God a symbol of the said religion! Please support your claims with sources that prove that this word symbolize Islam! Is there any Islamic organizations that use it? No. But many Islamic organizations does use the
crescent and star.
Here's a few examples:
That's why I think the Star and Crescent is the most representative of Islam and I don't think that there's any Islamic sects that is against it and hence why it's the one that should be used in the template. Thank you! Shorouq★The★Super★ninja2 ( talk) 22:32, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
The original content features a source from a islamophic writer whose source still remains I didn’t even remove it all the additional information added is from the sealed nectar a seerah or biography regarding the prophet muhammed life and Hadith sources which are sahih and the views of Islamic scholars regarding in what happened to umm qirfa however certain users like Tolwol and mehmood have reverted this edits based on baseless allegations like whitewashing and being poorly sourced even though they can’t prove it the recent edit by mehmood gives no reason there is a lot of edit warring going on to just look at the edit history I request fresh eyes look at the case from a more neutral source on here who know the Wikipedia rules and are obliged by them here is where the Wikipedia article in question
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banu_Fazara 213.107.1.209 ( talk) 21:33, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
Until it was recently change it said he had been criticised for " and his marriage to Aisha when she was six years old, which according to most estimates was consummated when she was nine." It now reads "and pedophilia for his child marriage to Aisha when she was six years old, which according to most Islamic sources was consummated when Aisha was nine." Doug Weller talk 13:52, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Does anybody still work on the Islam and Controversy task force? I've been making improvements over time to the task force page but I'm not sure if I should remove the non-existent links to project pages. It seems the project was partially abandoned. Pinging GregKaye, it seems you're the last active member from this task force. -- WikiCleanerMan ( talk) 22:40, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
Please comment at Talk:Al-Aqsa Mosque#Requested move 30 May 2022 - we are in need of editors who have the time to review the sources. Our Al-Aqsa Mosque article is about the small building. The large compound, also known as Al-Aqsa Mosque, is our article Temple Mount.
For reference:
Per
WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, what matters most is whether it is highly likely — much more likely than any other single topic, and more likely than all the other topics combined — to be the topic sought when a reader searches for that term
. It is also important to assess how the term is used amongst scholarly sources - an assessment of this has been provided at the discussion, and it would be good to have it confirmed by editors who have the time to review the sources themselves.
Thank you.
Onceinawhile ( talk) 08:39, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
Talk:Muhammad ibn Qasim#Requested move 4 July 2022 could use some input. Thanks, ☿ Apaugasma ( talk ☉) 12:05, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
User:Nutez has nominated Baháʼí Faith for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 22:26, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
There is a requested move at Talk:Fatimah#Requested move 16 July 2022 which may be of interest to members of this project or watchers of its talk page. ☿ Apaugasma ( talk ☉) 13:05, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
Hey there! There's an edit request open on Talk:Muhammad that I would like input on because of the topic and nature of the request. It has been open for over a month without replies, and I am not knowledgeable to accept it. Could someone take a look at it to see if it's good, needs changing, or deniable? Thanks. SWinxy ( talk) 06:06, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
The article on the Abbasid caliph al-Muti has been submitted for Featured Article. All interested editors are invited to participate. Constantine ✍ 18:20, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
AFD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abdul Jabbar Al Rifai needs assistance in evaluating notability. Jahaza ( talk) 01:18, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
Hello, |
Want to add Ibrahim Raza Khan on this project, how can i do this, can anyone tell me. KhanQadriRazvi ( talk) 17:53, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
The page Islamic dietary laws covers most of the key points, but has a retinue of cleanup tags - largely in relation to the particularly bad state of its sourcing. Iskandar323 ( talk) 09:45, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Library now features what appears to be full access to Brill Online, including all of their books, the many top journals published by them, as well as all of their encyclopedic reference works.
For users editing Islam-related articles, this notably includes all versions of the Encyclopaedia of Islam, the Encyclopaedia Islamica, the Encyclopaedia of the Qurʾān, the new fascicles of Encyclopædia Iranica, and much, much more.
Once registered and logged in at WP:LIBRARY, click this link to search their entire database, and this link to select the encyclopedic reference work of your choice. You may want to add those links to the bookmark toolbar in your browser...
Be sure to spread the happy news to other editors who might be interested! ☿ Apaugasma ( talk ☉) 21:20, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
Salams, Deoband Community Wikimedia is a recognized affiliate of Wikimedia and it began with its subjective focus on the global Deobandi scholarship. The affiliate is looking forward to widening its focus to "general Islamic scholarship, Islamic history, Islamic academia etc", something that has remained deeply underrepresented on the encyclopedia. I'd be more than glad to have opinions of interested editors from the WikiProject on the affiliate's Meta page. Regards, ─ The Aafī (talk) 09:59, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
@ Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Islamic bicycle
Bookku ( talk) 11:20, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Wahhabism#Requested move 19 December 2022 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. – robertsky ( talk) 06:39, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
An article that you have been involved in editing— Islamic bicycle—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Chidgk1 ( talk) 07:31, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
Category:Islamic scholars has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you.— Qwerfjkl talk 22:05, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
Which articles are deemed to have blasphemous content leading to Pakistan's current ban on Wikipedia? If they can be identified, it might be possible to review the content.-- Ipigott ( talk) 19:13, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
There is a proposal on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Islam-related articles regarding Islamic honorifics and user-generated calligraphic images which may be of interest. ☿ Apaugasma ( talk ☉) 01:41, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Muslim campaign at Córdoba Cathedral#Requested move 15 February 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ❯❯❯ Raydann (Talk) 21:18, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
I have seen an editor mark several articles as being of "top importance" to this group. Since this editor was marking articles as being of top-importance to every WikiProject, I doubt that this was done correctly. Please consider reviewing Category:Top-importance Islam-related articles and adjusting the contents to reflect this group's preferences. WhatamIdoing ( talk) 02:47, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
Could you help to fix links to the disambuiguation page Hijri calendar. It is generally better for the reader to link to specific articles rather than disambiguation pages and this could be Islamic calendar, Tabular Islamic calendar or Solar Hijri calendar but I do not have the exertise to link to the correct one. A list of the articles including this link is available at Disambig fix list for Hijri calendar. Thanks for any help.— Rod talk 11:05, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Muslim conquest of Spain#Requested move 28 March 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Super Ψ Dro 07:29, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi, I think we need your opinion on the RFD for Islams. Thanks. Lenticel ( talk) 00:10, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Quality assessments by Wikipedia editors rate articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at
Wikipedia:Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent
Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a |class=
parameter to {{
WikiProject banner shell}}, which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.
No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to {{ WikiProject banner shell}}, and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.
However, if your project has decided to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass {{
WPBannerMeta}} a new |QUALITY_CRITERIA=custom
parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present.
Aymatth2 (
talk)
15:57, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
User:DGG has died, but left User:DGG/Arabic-Persian literacy relation in progress. Please see if this content is of use to this project. BD2412 T 17:34, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
You are invited to give an opinion. Panam2014 ( talk) 00:33, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
Please see here for more details: Talk:Afghanistan_conflict_(1978–present)#Should_be_renamed_to_Afghan_Conflict_(1978–present) FOARP ( talk) 08:53, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
If you have an opinion, please join the discussion. Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 16:14, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
...is used in many pages ( Aqidah, Imam, Muslims) for illustrative purposes without any critical analysis. I am not sure it is wise to have a painting from an orientalist painter as that illustration; there is a good chance that it may incorrectly depict some aspects of salah.
Could someone with experience check that the details are correct? In particular the following look suspicious to me (though I know next to nothing about Muslim rites, Sunni or otherwise):
Tigraan Click here for my talk page ("private" contact) 17:28, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
FYI Template:AHM ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs) has been nominated for deletion -- 64.229.90.172 ( talk) 03:58, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
There should be a style guide for articles talking about surahs of the Qur'an. There is some consistency between articles, as most of them contain summaries of the surah (eg. Al-Baqarah) but there are other some sections in some articles about surahs that are not in others. For example, some articles (especially ones about short surahs) contain a section transcribing the text itself (eg. At-Takathur), some contain a section about the mentioning of specific prophets in the surah (eg. Al-Baqarah), and some contain exegesis (eg. Al-Ma'idah). There should be a specific format to follow when writing articles about surahs. For example:
First few paragraphs Summary Text (can be translated) Exegesis etc. Homeostasis39 ( talk) 15:36, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
Could someone more knowledgable take a look at Category:Eid (Islam) and help with the sort keys. Looks sort of odd to have Eid al-Fitr sorted as F, but Eid al-Ghadir sorted as an E. Thank You.18:00, 15 May 2023 (UTC) Naraht ( talk) 18:00, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lake Zamkaft until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
Eastmain ( talk • contribs) 17:13, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
There is sudden change to longstanding redirect to a different article. To understand Wikipedia community opinions, requesting inputs @ Talk:Usama#Request for inputs. Bookku ( talk) 10:11, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
Hello, |
References
Hi there, I'm experimenting new layouts for this project userbox. Do y'all prefer the current version or a new proposal? Let me know your thoughts! Est. 2021 ( talk · contribs) 20:19, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
Hello, User:Sodicadl nominated the article Islam (which I assume is a rather important article for this wikiproject) for GA at Talk:Islam/GA2. I came on as a reviewer way back in January, but I have been unable to dedicate enough time to continue the review and asked for a new reviewer in April. No one has come forward yet, so I'm posting the request here if anyone would like to pick it up. Thanks, Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 21:21, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
There is an ongoing discussion at Talk:Witchcraft#Ridiculous! about changing the content of the lead and core definitions at Witchcraft. As the article has content about practices in Islam, members might want to check it out. - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 18:29, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
I found the page /info/en/?search=Fatwas_of_Barelvi_Muslims during random fixing of uncategorized pages and I suspect it should be merged into /info/en/?search=List_of_fatwas.
I am not the most knowledgeable about Islamic jurisprudence and would greatly appreciate any help that could be given on this matter. AevumNova ( talk) 02:46, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Syed Ahmad Khan#Requested move 11 July 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ModernDayTrilobite ( talk • contribs) 14:28, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
Arab–Byzantine wars has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke ( talk) 16:19, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_January_10#Scholars_of_Islam was closed without consensus. Does someone here have a better idea how to untangle this knot? Marcocapelle ( talk) 07:20, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Mubarak Mosque, Tilford#Requested move 22 July 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. UtherSRG (talk) 18:48, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
I have taken the long overdue step of creating an Al-Aqsa Mosque compound page to encompass the full architectural history of Al-Aqsa all in one place. This was not done previously, with there being separate articles for the Dome of the Rock, Al-Aqsa Mosque and Minarets of the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound, etc., but no single page drawing them all together historically and architecturally. The temple mount page provides some architectural overview, but it is so bound up in narrating the full history of the site and is substructure (so much so that it uses the 'mountain' infobox template, not the 'religious building' one) that it has never done full credit to the actual superstructure. Now there is a page that ties it all together. Iskandar323 ( talk) 09:08, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Protests against Quran desecration in Sweden, which is within the scope of this WikiProject. GnocchiFan ( talk) 17:14, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
As this is a highly active WikiProject, I would like to introduce you to Credibility bot. This is a bot that makes it easier to track source usage across articles through automated reports and alerts. We piloted this approach at Wikipedia:Vaccine safety and we want to offer it to any subject area or domain. We need your support to demonstrate demand for this toolkit. If you have a desire for this functionality, or would like to leave other feedback, please endorse the tool or comment at WP:CREDBOT. Thanks! Harej ( talk) 17:32, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
Hi – this seems like a very promising article on a notable subject. Not new as such, but could do with some copyedits from members of this Wikiproject if anyone is interested. Thanks 😊 GnocchiFan ( talk) 14:35, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
Requesting inputs at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Islamic Bill of Rights for Women in the Mosque (2nd nomination) discussion. - Bookku ( talk) 05:16, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
See Talk:Political Islam#Section Documentation Centre Political Islam violates NPOV Doug Weller talk 15:30, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Arba'een#Requested move 30 August 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. UtherSRG (talk) 11:32, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Muslim period in the Indian subcontinent#Requested move 8 September 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ❯❯❯ Raydann (Talk) 16:04, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
There is a discussion on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Islam-related articles regarding the NPOV usage of "the prophet Muhammad" or "the prophet" which may be of interest to this WikiProject. ☿ Apaugasma ( talk ☉) 18:30, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
There are several repeated sentences/paragraphs in Conversion to Islam. This should be fixed. Kk.urban ( talk) 23:53, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Al-Inshirah#Requested move 10 September 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ❯❯❯ Raydann (Talk) 03:33, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
An editor has started an RfC asking "Should Operation Al-Aqsa Flood by Hamas be included in the List of Islamist terrorist attacks?" at Talk:List of Islamist terrorist attacks#Should Operation Al-Aqsa Flood by Hamas included in the list of Islamist Terrorist attacks?. Interested editors are invited to participate. TarnishedPath talk 09:15, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
Input welcome in merger discussion about the Order of Assassins. Iskandar323 ( talk) 12:52, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
Please see: Talk:Islam and cats#Change Contents in Islam and cats (and the post immediately above it). I'l leery of editing that article in the detail-level requested because I'm not a subject matter expert and don't have a basis on which to evaluate the claims made about the sources in relation to other source material. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 18:16, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
Western Wall has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk) 01:15, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Muslim conquest of Spain#Requested move 5 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 17:11, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Muhammad Khatami#Requested move 6 January 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 01:10, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Re'im music festival massacre#Requested move 6 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 13:02, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Siege of Gaza City#Requested move 6 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 19:28, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Holit massacre#Requested move 10 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 06:32, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Nir Yitzhak massacre#Requested move 10 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 06:37, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Mu'tazilism#Requested move 10 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 20:00, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Nasheed#Requested move 11 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 01:06, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Houthi involvement in the Israel–Hamas war#Requested move 12 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces ( talk) 10:17, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
Please provide your opinions and comments at Talk:Banu_Fazara#RfC on Umm Qirfa that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. 2A00:801:707:AFAE:FC02:57DA:9BB7:8E6E ( talk) 23:15, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
Hi everyone - just letting this WikiProject know that a Peer Review of LGBT in the Ottoman Empire (with the intention of improving this to Good Article status) is currently under way. If anyone has anything to add to the article / review, it would be greatly appreciated. Thank you! GnocchiFan ( talk) 17:19, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
Dear all, I work at the University of Edinburgh as Wikimedian in Residence and am currently supporting students on a 55-80hr volunteering project where they choose a topic they would like to research from October to (end of) March and where their research and writing would help help improve their studies and also the topic coverage on Wikipedia. One student has chosen as their focus: Islamic history and culture. Within this, they have February and March left to work on their project and they have decided they would like to spend 50hrs researching and writing pages covering the 50 names of God in Islam. A couple of example pages have already been written:
They are keen to continue on the same trajectory as they find the research rewarding and believe Wikipedia readers will too. My only concern is that the two examples are quite quote-heavy as things stand and that 50 individual pages might not be welcome in terms of 'bloating' Wikipedia or that it might not be academically challenging to write 50 similar articles or that it might just be better covered in one condensed summary page on Wikipedia (something one of Islamic Art lecturers also confessed might be more appropriate for an encyclopedia). The argument put forward is that Arabic Wikipedia and Kazakh Wikipedia already have versions of the pages linked above so why not English Wikipedia too. I just thought I'd check what the consensus view might be before they proceed further. I do not want to dismiss the project or 'gatekeep' in any way but thought I'd check what the view of WikiProject Islam editors might be before we progressed or if you might have alternative suggestions for a project focus given Islamic history and culture covers a vast swathe of potential topic areas if this current idea is not viable. Any thoughts do let me know and I'll pass on to the student accordingly. Thanks! Stinglehammer ( talk) 18:15, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
And by that I mean all projects that are related to Islam in Wikipedia ( Template:Islam, Portal:Islam and WikiProject Islam) We need to use a unified icon for all of them.
And I think we should be using the crescent and star, because it doesn't matter if it was related with The Ottoman Empire, Greeks or any other nation, it is now the most popular icon for Islam in both Islamic countries AND especially across non-Muslim people to refer to Islam. And people of non-Muslim backgrounds and those who can't read Arabic or still learning it and the ones who are not familiar with Arabic alphabet and calligraphy would have it difficult for them to know that this word is Allah and it means God in Arabic and in this context it refers to the Muslim God only (although it used by all religions in the Arab World) and then realize that this article is about Islam. So, whether that this icon was popularized by Ottomans or not it is now the most recognizable icon for Islam across all nations. And moreover
some researchers say that it wasn't popularized by the Ottomans: How the quarter-crescent moon came to symbolize Islam is uncertain. Many explanations with varying degrees of plausibility have been offered. Among the most popular is the assertion that the symbol signifies the position ofthemoon and the planetVenus at dawn on 23 July 610 A.D., when the Prophet Mohammed received his initial revelation from God.
Cyril Glassé in his The New Encyclopedia of Islam (2001 edition, s.v. "Moon") states that "in the language of conventional symbols, the crescent and star have become the symbols of Islam as much as the cross is the symbol of Christianity." [1]
The word Allah simply means God in Arabic and it predates Islam. Those who claim that the word Allah is "inclusive of all Muslims", please provide your proof. All religions with all the sects believe in a God but that doesn't make the calligraphy of the word God a symbol of the said religion! Please support your claims with sources that prove that this word symbolize Islam! Is there any Islamic organizations that use it? No. But many Islamic organizations does use the crescent and star. Here's a few examples:
List of examples
|
---|
|
That's why I think the Star and Crescent is the most representative of Islam and I don't think that there's any Islamic sects that is against it and hence why it's the one that should be used. Thank you! ☆SuperNinja2☆ 12:16, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
And why we need a unified icon
Star and crescent do not represent any religion as a whole.
Also, In the English language, the word Allah generally refers to God in Islam.
Star and crescent can be symbol of a organization or as design of mosque.
Various calligraphies including calligraphy of the word Allah are also used in the mosque. So reason is not valid.
This can't be a reason to change all different images to one
According to who? Provide your sources: Burden of proof is on you, you are making claim that Star and crescent is related to Islam.
Allah is Arabic word, not English: I know, but it is English Wikipedia, even though ar:Template:Islam also use calligraphy of the word Allah.
did not provide a single reason to make Allah more reasonable to be used: I am against Star and crescent image, for other image we can also discuss, but if not Star and crescent then default is File:Allah3.svg
Burden of proof is on you, you are making claim that Star and crescent is related to Islam.
for other image we can also discussis not reasonable. So, why are you objecting the use of the crescent and star if you don't have a better alternative? How are we supposed to know that the said alternative is better than the crescent and star if we postpone the discussion if it? That is not rational. I already provided reliable sources and academic studies and researches but it's now clear enough for me that you didn't bother reading my argument. What a pity!
even though ar:Template:Islam also use calligraphy of the word Allah
And you haven't provide any Islamic sources which claim that Star and crescent is related to Islam.
that means it is used in Arabic context: What? See calligraphy of the word Allah as symbol or icon. To become familiar with the icon you need to know what it is.
you don't have a better alternative: I do have, leave it as it is.
it look more like a Original research
none of the cited sources are reliable except one
See calligraphy of the word Allah as symbol or icon. To become familiar with the icon you need to know what it is.
The crescent and star feature in the flags of many Islamic countries which were formerly part of the Ottoman Empire
The image you propose represent Ottoman Empire and Pakistan more than Islam.
Brandon University: [5] This article is about work on Stained Glass
Yale University: [6] states- certainly not in uniform use among Muslims
The crescent and star feature in the flags of many Islamic countries which were formerly part of the Ottoman Empire. Thus, in the language of conventional symbols, the crescent and star have become the symbols of Islam.
I do have, leave it as it is.
If a country's flag is used it does not mean that it represents any religion.
Do you know that is written on image of Template:Chinese Buddhism, but still it represent the religion.
I don't know much about Buddhism, so I can't give my opinion on this subject: Neither about Islam. It's not whataboutery, it's about Wikipedia consensus and common rule across site.
sectarian nature of religion...This may be a reason we should not impose a unified symbol across Wikipedia. This point regarding the unified symbol should be discussed first in any comments supporting this change. Why do we need it?
Isaac has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Spinixster (chat!) 10:03, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
@ JorgeLaArdilla, QalasQalas, Idell, TheAafi, TheEagle107, Captain Assassin!, Wiki id2, Sa.vakilian, Ed Poor, Alarob, Imagine Wizard, Masum Ibn Musa, Resnjari, Ahendra, and Super ninja2:@ Cplakidas, Chongkian, Ratekreel, Ulubatli Hasan, Melofors, Hamza Ali Shah, MartinPoulter, GoldenBootWizard276, AvDahan, Ammarpad, Farhoudk, Svest~enwiki, Zereshk, LatinoMuslim, SFGiants, Chaos, Sulaimandaud, Zakksez, Absar, Darz kkg, Euryalus, AA, Leroy65X, Doc sameer, Peter Deer, Nafsadh, Razimantv Alt, Nasiryounus, Nawabmalhi, Masssly, Samee, MezzoMezzo, Arteyu, Owais Khursheed, Em-mustapha, Naila Khan, City of Silver, Johnbod, and Coalcity58: Can we arrange a Ramadan editathon to edit create, elaborate, correct, and translate Islamic articles? Arabic wikipedia is arranging it for 3 years 1, 2 and Bengali wikipedia for 5 years. So why not the English wikipedia? 202.134.9.145 ( talk) 17:54, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
@ Ahendra, Sa.vakilian, Peaceray, Bduke, Steelpillow, Gog the Mild, 4meter4, GELongstreet, Utfor, Invasive Spices, Rytyho usa, Faendalimas, StarTrekker, Vanisaac, and Emir of Wikipedia:@ JorgeLaArdilla, QalasQalas, Idell, TheAafi, TheEagle107, Captain Assassin!, Wiki id2, Sa.vakilian, Ed Poor, Alarob, Imagine Wizard, Masum Ibn Musa, Resnjari, Ahendra, and Super ninja2:@ Cplakidas, Chongkian, Ratekreel, Ulubatli Hasan, Melofors, Hamza Ali Shah, MartinPoulter, GoldenBootWizard276, AvDahan, Ammarpad, Farhoudk, Svest~enwiki, Zereshk, LatinoMuslim, SFGiants, Chaos, Sulaimandaud, Zakksez, Absar, Darz kkg, Euryalus, AA, Leroy65X, Doc sameer, Peter Deer, Nafsadh, Razimantv Alt, Nasiryounus, Nawabmalhi, Masssly, Samee, MezzoMezzo, Arteyu, Owais Khursheed, Em-mustapha, Naila Khan, City of Silver, Johnbod, and Coalcity58: Please look over the last discussions about anti-Salafi edits in Talk:Sexuality in Islam. 202.134.9.145 ( talk) 18:58, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
An article in the scope of this Wikiproject is currently up for Featured Article review. Input is welcomed to decide if this article is worthy of the FA rating. MartinPoulter ( talk) 19:25, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Briefly, the dispute described
here is
1) whether this statement should be allowed in the lede
2) whether revivalist preacher
Abul A'la Maududi should be included along with two other scholars listed who support this position (i.e. belief in Jinn is a necessary part of Islam).
3) and whether as evidence of the significance of this belief, a brief description of the troubles of
Nasr Abu Zayd "who was
threated with death for apostasy" in the 1990s "(in part) because he didn't believe in jinn", should be included in the article. --
Louis P. Boog (
talk) 18:14, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
Louis P. Boog (
talk)
18:14, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
References
User Manticore had repeatedly deleted sentences about Muslim growth projection in the past and in the futures based on Pew Research estimation. He obviously using different reason. Firstly he claimed it was of topic, then he claimed it was poorly written (it could targetted Non English speaker contributors) and he also claimed it was crystal ball which denied in wikipedia (but Pew Research estimation based on science not crystal ball and many wiki articles used it as sources). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.140.166.103 ( talk) 13:11, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
According to the discussion above:
☆SuperNinja2☆ 16:29, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
Crusading movement has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Borsoka ( talk) 11:28, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:2024 Iranian Strikes in Israel#Requested move 13 April 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. RodRabelo7 ( talk) 21:31, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:2024 Iranian strikes in Israel#Requested move 14 April 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. RodRabelo7 ( talk) 19:34, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion concerning the question of religion and whether or not it is an appropriate subject for the Fringe Theories Noticeboard. Experienced editors are encouraged to join the conversation. - Ad Orientem ( talk) 19:51, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Biblical and Quranic narratives#Requested move 7 April 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ❯❯❯ Raydann (Talk) 17:26, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
Couple of week back @ Louis P. Boog had made brief input request on this discussion board but may be users missed during busy schedules last some weeks.
As a discussion facilitator I feel more inputs at Talk:Jinn would be helpful in the on going WP:Due discussions. Pl. do not give inputs here but at Talk:Jinn only.
Bookku ( talk) 02:16, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Since I posted the above notice about the Featured Article Candidacy of Empire of the Sultans, there has been more interest and the review process has progressed further, which I'm very grateful for. We still need more reviewers to take part, following the instructions at Wikipedia:FACSUPPORTOPPOSE. A great deal of work has gone into both the article and the review; this is a chance to make a community decision on the results. Thanks in advance for any help! MartinPoulter ( talk) 13:22, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
Your input would be appreciated at Talk:Abu Lu'lu'a Firuz#Sources for the name Piruz Nahavandi. Summaries of the dispute and discussion thread may be found here. Thanks! ☿ Apaugasma ( talk ☉) 15:20, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Grand Mosque of Erzurum#Requested move 4 May 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Wikiexplorationandhelping ( talk) 13:08, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
also Pre-RfC stage info:
|
---|
As a discussion facilitator fyi a WP:DUE discussion (some aspects may touch WP:Fringe) is at Talk:Jinn#Pre-RfC stage's WP:RSN#Hachette Livre and WP:ORN step. After RSN and WP:ORN step, RfC formatting is likely to be discussed at Talk:Jinn#Pre-RfC in a new sub section. |
Bookku ( talk) 04:56, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
An RFC is in progress at Talk:Rafida#RFC_on_Rejection_of_Truth_in_Lede. Your participation is requested. Robert McClenon ( talk) 05:44, 22 May 2024 (UTC)