User talk:1234567: Difference between revisions

User talk:1234567 (view source)

Revision as of 09:07, 29 April 2013

7,365 bytes removed , 29 April 2013

→‎Essay about the Ages of Muhammad's Wives

1234567

Editors, Reviewers

1,399

edits

@@ Line 17: / Line 17: @@
 ==Essay about the Ages of Muhammad's Wives==
-The essay submission function seems to be out of action today.
+:I think Al-Uzza would look good in an article about the Satanic Verses. In fact, there is around the internet some lovely neo-Pagan artwork featuring Semitic deities, but most of it would attract copyright restrictions. The image I posted here is public domain.[[User:1234567|1234567]] ([[User talk:1234567|talk]]) 23:29, 20 April 2013 (PDT)
-:Hi. I'm moving everything to this page (you can continue editing there): [[Ages of Muhammads Wives at Marriage|Ages of Muhammad's Wives at Marriage]]. Let me know when you have finished. Thanks.[[User:Sahabah|--Sahabah]] ([[User talk:Sahabah|talk]]) 05:13, 15 April 2013 (PDT)
-:I'll check the Essay sumbission page. The apostate submission is also not working probably due to the last software update. --[[User:Axius|Axius]] ([[User talk:Axius|talk]]) 05:26, 15 April 2013 (PDT)
-::I fixed it, thankfully it was an easy fix. This had not been working for the last 2 weeks when I updated the [[MediaWiki:Edit Monitor|edit monitoring]] system.--[[User:Axius|Axius]] ([[User talk:Axius|talk]]) 18:17, 15 April 2013 (PDT)
-:::Good. I'm sure there's a way round such problems for people like me, but we wouldn't want to make life any harder for the apostates.[[User:1234567|1234567]] ([[User talk:1234567|talk]]) 18:23, 15 April 2013 (PDT)
-::::1234567, like your other two pages, I think this page will be good for the main space. All of your calculations are based on the Islamic sources which is what we require. If you have no objections I will do that.
-::::Also, for future articles, note that we like to include the entire relevant quote from the source rather than only the name and number of a hadith/section of Tabari etc. See the [http://wikiislam.net/wiki/72_Virgins#References 72 Virgins article's  references] to get an idea of what I mean.
-::::So, rather than this: <nowiki><ref>{{Bukhari|4|54|476}}</ref></nowiki>
-::::We will have this: <nowiki><ref>"''Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, "The first batch (of people) who will enter Paradise will be (glittering) like the full moon, and the batch next to them will be (glittering) like the most brilliant star in the sky. Their hearts will be as if the heart of a single man, for they will have neither enmity nor jealousy amongst themselves; everyone will have two wives from the houris, (who will be so beautiful, pure and transparent that) the marrow of the bones of their legs will be seen through the bones and the flesh.''" - {{Bukhari|4|54|476}}</ref></nowiki> [[User:Sahabah|--Sahabah]] ([[User talk:Sahabah|talk]]) 18:52, 15 April 2013 (PDT)
-:::::I have no objection to doing this, but it will be a huge amount of information.[[User:1234567|1234567]] ([[User talk:1234567|talk]]) 19:06, 15 April 2013 (PDT)
-:::::Also there is no objection to categorising my essay however you like. Note, however, that I did make a few mildly emotive comments on my conclusions. At present I have not much to add to the content, but I am not satisfied with a few of the pictures, so I will spend a little longer looking for good ones.[[User:1234567|1234567]] ([[User talk:1234567|talk]]) 19:09, 15 April 2013 (PDT)
-::::::I like the idea of the full quotes too. They're very useful/convenient, especially for content that cannot be readily accessed/checked/read (books, etc). --[[User:Axius|Axius]] ([[User talk:Axius|talk]]) 19:37, 15 April 2013 (PDT)
-::::::::Great. Although I wouldn't trouble myself with looking for new images. We prefer minimal images in pages. A single image can be great. We can use it in our main random image+article template. Two is sometimes necessary. Any more than that (unless it's scientific diagrams) IMO is overkill.[[User:Sahabah|--Sahabah]] ([[User talk:Sahabah|talk]]) 19:42, 15 April 2013 (PDT)
-:::::::::1234567, about the images, they do make the article visually interesting but sometimes they're not related so some images may not need to be included. Do you have anything to say in defense of them, of why you'd like to include them? In any case we're focusing on the factual statements so if they're not included its ok in my opinion. Maybe they can be included at the end when all the articles have been written. What do you think? --[[User:Axius|Axius]] ([[User talk:Axius|talk]]) 04:53, 16 April 2013 (PDT)
-::::::::::I don't feel strongly if you'd prefer not to have them. But in my experience, people are more likely to read an article that has pictures. I have a lurking suspicion that this article is not very interesting. On one hand, it's a list of facts and figures, which is difficult to read. On the other hand, it is impossible to endorse the conclusion unless one has made the effort to do the reading. That is why, despite the ready availability of the information, nobody has ever before published anything similar. So pictures might draw the audience in. But it's not as if I painted them myself. So it doesn't bother me personally if you leave them out.
-::::::::::I think I've filled in all the references now, so I will resist the temptation to make any more changes.[[User:1234567|1234567]] ([[User talk:1234567|talk]]) 05:02, 16 April 2013 (PDT)
-I understand your concerns, but I think they are unfounded. What makes an article interesting is the value of its content, and this article has it in spades. A comparative article would be this one (spit into two parts):
-* http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Dhul-Qarnayn_and_the_Sun_Controversy_in_the_Qur%27an_(Part_One)
-* http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Dhul-Qarnayn_and_the_Sun_Controversy_in_the_Qur%27an_(Part_Two)
-It is very long and I'm sure many would consider it difficult to read, but it's one of our most valued articles. And it has not a single image. IMO the wives article looks a whole lot better without the images. With them it make the page a lot more cluttered and vastly lowers its tone. About drawing readers in, I can almost guarantee a page like this will receive a lot of views on WikiIslam. Related sites critical of Islam may not find pages like this to be a success, but then their target audience is usually different to ours. And TBH this site is there for those who want to actually learn accurate facts about Islam. If a reader needs images to keep them interested, then they're at the wrong site. [[User:Sahabah|--Sahabah]] ([[User talk:Sahabah|talk]]) 12:00, 16 April 2013 (PDT)
-:It looks pretty good. Thank you for fixing my broken link to the Aisha-apologetics.
-:Who is Madudi and what is ''Tafhimul Quran'' about? I don't have a problem with your adding the detail that Zaynab was Muhammad's cousin; although not strictly relevant to the topic, it adds interest. (But it won't shock a British reader very much. Queen Victoria also married her first cousin.) However, I probably ought to know something about the reference to which I'm supposed to have referred. I have added the early-source references that prove their kinship.
-:I will be writing more about Zaynab's whole family very soon. There are gaps in her biography (nobody seems to know the name of her first husband, and the popular story that Muhammad built her a nice little workshop for her leather-crafts doesn't seem to be trackable to a primary source) but a ridiculous amount is known about her five siblings.[[User:1234567|1234567]] ([[User talk:1234567|talk]]) 19:30, 16 April 2013 (PDT)
-::You're welcome. It's a tafsir ([[W:The Meaning of the Qur'an|The Meaning of the Qur'an]]) by [[W:Abul A'la Maududi|Abul A'la Maududi]]. Thanks for adding references to the primary sources! Yeah, those Royals did love their inbreeding, but they're not the founders or lawmakers of the second largest religion. A lot of Muslims deny Muhammad ever married a cousin, and too few non-Muslims are aware of it. [[User:Sahabah|--Sahabah]] ([[User talk:Sahabah|talk]]) 22:43, 16 April 2013 (PDT)
-hi 1234567, after this discussion about images, we made a new [http://wikiislam.net/wiki/WikiIslam:Policies_and_Guidelines#Images policy] on images that basically says "any number of images are welcome as long as they are directly related to the article". So there's no limit of 2 images per article any longer. So for example some of the ones you uploaded ([[:File:Khadija.jpg]], [[:File:Al-Uzza with Zodiac.jpg]], [[:File:Mount Hira Cave.jpg]], etc) were great and we would love to have images like that because they are directly related to the article content and are very informative. --[[User:Axius|Axius]] ([[User talk:Axius|talk]]) 18:52, 20 April 2013 (PDT)
-:I think Al-Uzza would look good in an article about the Satanic Verses. In fact, there is around the internet some lovely neo-Pagan artwork featuring Semitic deities, but most of it would attract copyright restrictions. The image I posted here is public domain.[[User:1234567|1234567]] ([[User talk:1234567|talk]]) 23:29, 20 April 2013 (PDT)
 ::I've added it here: http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Satanic_Verses_(The_Life_of_Mahomet) . Yeah, it looks good in that one. However, (Axius can correct me if I'm wrong) neo-Pagan artwork would fall outside of the new policies, even if they were not copyright restricted. [[User:Sahabah|--Sahabah]] ([[User talk:Sahabah|talk]]) 03:30, 21 April 2013 (PDT)
 ::Any examples of that artwork on a temporary upload or external link? Thanks for adding that image. --[[User:Axius|Axius]] ([[User talk:Axius|talk]]) 09:10, 21 April 2013 (PDT)
 ::: Okay, that wasn't a no, meaning you would consider it. But wouldn't neo-Pagan (i.e. contemporary pagan) artwork be the same as you considering graffiti artwork if it was of a pagan goddess? Unlike the other image provided by 1234567, it wouldn't have any historical connection to the subject. It would just be for "illustrative" purposes (something the new policies say no to).[[User:Sahabah|--Sahabah]] ([[User talk:Sahabah|talk]]) 09:18, 21 April 2013 (PDT)
 ::::I was just wondering what it looks like. --[[User:Axius|Axius]] ([[User talk:Axius|talk]]) 09:25, 21 April 2013 (PDT)
 :::::A google search brought up this - everything both ancient and modern. https://www.google.com.au/search?q=Al-Uzza+Al-Lat+Manat&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=K2N0UcPHLdCYiAeh8oDwAQ&ved=0CDoQsAQ&biw=1366&bih=621
 :::::Yes, I see what you mean about neo-Pagan artwork being a modern reconstruction that would probably have only tenuous links to the original paganism. (''Pace'' those modern pantheists who think otherwise; but neo-Pagans do not sacrifice their infants to Molech!) The spirit of the reconstruction is not too difficult to hit off in the case of the Arabian trinity, since Al-Uzza is Minerva/Athena and Al-Lat is Ceres/Demeter. Manat has no obvious European parallel (the Graiai? Nemesis?), which explains something about the differences between the two cultures; but she is nevertheless a recognisable "type".[[User:1234567|1234567]] ([[User talk:1234567|talk]]) 15:12, 21 April 2013 (PDT)
 ::::::Thanks for the link and info. That is definitely way above my level of expertise/knowledge in that area, but it sounds really interesting. --[[User:Axius|Axius]] ([[User talk:Axius|talk]]) 10:54, 27 April 2013 (PDT)
+:::::::Yes, very interesting, but somewhat academic. If Ancient Semitic paganism were still being practised today, we would have to start a WikiSemitism site and write about all the evils of human sacrifice, ritual prostitution and violent raiding. But it isn't. The few Neo-Pagans I've met have been very gentle people who try to disbelieve the dark history of the ancient religions and focus on back-to-nature pantheism, healthy eating and meditation. There is no real connection between their beliefs (as shown in the pretty artwork) and the original religions that indirectly inspired them.
+:::::::By contrast, the problem with Islam is that there are Muslims alive to day who try to be exactly like Muhammad.[[User:1234567|1234567]] ([[User talk:1234567|talk]]) 02:07, 29 April 2013 (PDT)
 ==New articles based on your talk page comments==