Autochecked users, Bureaucrats, Editors, oversight, recentchangescleanup, Reviewers, rollback, Administrators
19,746
edits
User talk:1234567: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→Aisha
(→Aisha) |
(→Aisha) |
||
| Line 119: | Line 119: | ||
:::Regarding the description of Aisha. I haven't read the entire article, but just considering that section on its own, I don't think it's necessary to even have that line there. One way that could have been handled without losing any information is by adding a footnote, e.g., "He said the angel Jibril had appeared to him in a dream, holding a veiled child and saying, “Messenger of Allah, this one will remove some of your sorrow. This one has some of the qualities of Khadijah.”<nowiki><ref>Note that Islamic sources generally convey that Khadijah was a confident, enthusiastic, determined and intelligent women.</ref></nowiki> Then he lifted the veil, revealing that the child was Aisha." [[User:Sahabah|--Sahabah]] ([[User talk:Sahabah|talk]]) 22:24, 29 April 2013 (PDT) | :::Regarding the description of Aisha. I haven't read the entire article, but just considering that section on its own, I don't think it's necessary to even have that line there. One way that could have been handled without losing any information is by adding a footnote, e.g., "He said the angel Jibril had appeared to him in a dream, holding a veiled child and saying, “Messenger of Allah, this one will remove some of your sorrow. This one has some of the qualities of Khadijah.”<nowiki><ref>Note that Islamic sources generally convey that Khadijah was a confident, enthusiastic, determined and intelligent women.</ref></nowiki> Then he lifted the veil, revealing that the child was Aisha." [[User:Sahabah|--Sahabah]] ([[User talk:Sahabah|talk]]) 22:24, 29 April 2013 (PDT) | ||
::::hi 1234567, right, we didnt know the writeup was based on content written earlier. No problem, we'll wait for you to be done. | ::::hi 1234567, right, we didnt know the writeup was based on content written earlier. No problem, we'll wait for you to be done. | ||
::::Sahabah is right about the intelligence issue. I'll assume temporarily I'm a critical reader. I would ask questions like: "What is the evidence for her being confident, strong-willed and intelligent? How do these qualities compare to those found in other women of that time? Was she exceptional in any way? Did anyone attest to these qualities explicitly?". etc. You'll realize you're better off leaving these conclusions out. | ::::Sahabah is right about the intelligence issue. I'll assume temporarily I'm a critical reader. I would ask questions like: ''"What is the evidence for her being confident, strong-willed and intelligent? How do these qualities compare to those found in other women of that time? Was she exceptional in any way? Did anyone attest to these qualities explicitly? Were there any additional qualities? Maybe it was something else that was being referred to, such as praying habits, seeking the approval of Muhammad and so on"''. etc. You'll realize you're better off leaving these conclusions out. | ||
::::You want to write a complete story but I'm saying having an accurate and reliable story is of primary importance while a secondary issue is of the story being/appearing complete. Islamic sources mention only bits and pieces and if we report just those, we've done our job. Its not even necessary to write in conclusions/deductions and fill in any gaps. The facts are powerful enough on their own. So we're looking for statements like these: ''Aisha could in fact read[25] but she never learned to write.[26]''. They are directly referenced facts and have their own references (not combined). Here's a useful policy ([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research Wikipedia:No original research]), another of their core policies and I'll only mention the 'nutshell': | ::::You want to write a complete story but I'm saying having an accurate and reliable story is of primary importance while a secondary issue is of the story being/appearing complete. Islamic sources mention only bits and pieces and if we report just those, we've done our job. Its not even necessary to write in conclusions/deductions and fill in any gaps. The facts are powerful enough on their own. So we're looking for statements like these: ''Aisha could in fact read[25] but she never learned to write.[26]''. They are directly referenced facts and have their own references (not combined). Here's a useful policy ([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research Wikipedia:No original research]), another of their core policies and I'll only mention the 'nutshell': | ||
:::::''Wikipedia does not publish original thought: all material in Wikipedia must be attributable to a reliable, published source. Articles '''may not contain any new analysis or synthesis''' of published material that serves to advance a position '''not clearly advanced by the sources themselves'''.'' | :::::''Wikipedia does not publish original thought: all material in Wikipedia must be attributable to a reliable, published source. Articles '''may not contain any new analysis or synthesis''' of published material that serves to advance a position '''not clearly advanced by the sources themselves'''.'' | ||
::::He's also right about the 'weeping' issue. For example when newspapers report what people are saying, they use exact quotes. Usage of the actual words is better than using your own words even if you think the new words describe it better. | ::::He's also right about the 'weeping' issue. For example when newspapers report what people are saying, they use exact quotes. Usage of the actual words is better than using your own words even if you think the new words describe it better. | ||
::::I feel I've not done a complete job of explaining but hopefully this should help. --[[User:Axius|Axius]] ([[User talk:Axius|talk]]) 09:39, 30 April 2013 (PDT) | ::::I feel I've not done a complete job of explaining but hopefully this should help. --[[User:Axius|Axius]] ([[User talk:Axius|talk]]) 09:39, 30 April 2013 (PDT) | ||