Talk:Wahhabi Islam: From Revival and Reform to Global Jihad

Copied from talk page on wikipedia from where the article originated and was (almost all) deleted for its excessive length. While the length may be against Wikipedia policies I hope that (as it says below) of use to students of Ibn Abdul-Wahhab and Islam in general. I should note that while some may find the article less than complimentary of Ibn Abdul-Wahhab or Natana J. DeLong-Bas or wahhabism, it is not written as part of an effort to debunk Islam. --JoeTheOfficeDrone (talk) 21:02, 4 April 2018 (EDT)

Explanatory notes

I realize this is an unusually long article especially for a relatively obscure book. I've gone to all this trouble because DeLong-Bas's work is somewhat unique in being of basic considerable interest to anyone studying Ibn Abdul-Wahhab, but ummm ... not an easy read. So I thought going over the main points of the book -- as opposed a few paragraphs of description -- might provide a cliffsNotes "I read it so you won't have to" service.

The book is "the first extensive explication of the theology" of Ibn Abd al-Wahhab (according to one reviewer) and the first time an English speaker has made "a close study" of 14 volumes of Wahhab's collected works (I think). It is also the one book that contradicts the historical consensus that Wahhabis were Takfiris, who believed almost all other Muslims were not true Muslims. On the other hand at 290 not-terribly-well-written pages is likely to try the patience of even readers very interested in the Middle East and Saudi Arabia. I myself only summoned the will to finish reading it with inspiration of writing this article.

One other thing. I have shortened Ibn Abd al-Wahhab to "IAW" a number of times in the article to avoid too much repetition. al-Wahhab is one of the Names of God, so rather inappropriate for shortening. "Abd al-Wahhab" was the name of IAW's father, so is not so accurate either. I suppose "Wahhab" might work, but it's so ... un-Arabic IMHO. --BoogaLouie (talk) 23:26, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Very well researched and written essay, however, as per WP:PSTS, primary sources can not be used to "analyze, evaluate, interpret, or synthesize" the topic and WP:ANALYSIS needs to be supported by independent reliable sources. Tanbircdq (talk) 12:26, 10 April 2016 (UTC)