Jump to content

Talk:Criticism of Islam

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Frankystein3 (talk | contribs) at 14:23, 6 June 2022. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Vital article

Request approval for following addition on improper sexual conduct with minors in Islamic sources

My addition has been reverted multiple times without a serious justification. As you can see, it is fully sourced:

"====Sex with pre-pubescent girls and age of Muhammad's wife Aisha==== Critics have noted that the 4th verse of the 65th chapter of the Qur'an (Surah at-Talaq) seems to imply the permissibility of consummating marriages with girls who have not reached puberty. This criticism is significantly reinforced by classical Muslim commentaries on the verse, such as Tafsir al-Jalalayn and the tafsir of Maududi[1][2]"

Peer review request

Requesting peer review at Wikipedia:Peer review/Women in Islam/archive1,

Bookku (talk) 10:03, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting help in article expansion

Hi,

Requesting you to have a look at

Requesting article expansion help, if above topics interest you.

Thanks and regards Bookku (talk) 06:52, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Filtered content

  • Just for record and information,

Following content from the article has been deleted claiming to to be gibberish not suitable for lead of article plus being from self published source. Bookku (talk) 05:53, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"..According to John S. Evans unlike earlier times intellectual environment in which Islam exists is rapidly changing and is no longer able to avoid scrutiny of it's theology, history and practice. In spite of Islamist violent tactics, by passing of each day volume of critical analysis of Islam is increasing and thus censorship of criticism is and will become more and more difficult. Islam is not only being metamorphosed by scholars who are not raised in Islam but increasingly by growing numbers and movement of ex-Muslim intellectuals raising questions which Islamic apologists fail to address sincerely."[3]

References

  1. ^ al-Suyuti & al-Maḥalli, Jalal & Jalal (early 16th century). "Tafsīr al-Jalālayn". altafsir.com. Tafsir archived in the official Royal Aal al-Bayt Institute for Islamic Thought of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. Retrieved June 6, 2022. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  2. ^ Maududi, Abul A'la al- (1972). "Tafhimu'l-Qur'an". quranx.com (note: bottom of the linked page). Idara Tarjuman ul Qur'an, Lahore, Pakistan. Retrieved June 6, 2022.
  3. ^ Evans, John S. (May 2008). The Prophecies of Daniel 2. Xulon Press. pp. 238, 239. ISBN 978-1-60477-903-5.
That rationale for removing that passage seems valid to me. The postmodern writing style isn't appropriate, and a self-published author isn't notable enough to bother quoting. ~Anachronist (talk) 05:57, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I do not mind being pinged, but what would you like me to say? My reasons for removal can be found in the edit summary. --HyperGaruda (talk) 16:56, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not Neutral

Hello! Some of the parts of the article are not Neutral as per WP policy and directly accuse of(this and that) Instead it could be made neutral point of view MRC2RULES (talk) 07:54, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Some parts of your post are unclear. Ian.thomson (talk) 07:59, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@MRC2RULES: I came here to say you really need to be more specific, I also have no clue what you want. Doug Weller talk 17:13, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Strong focus on morality in the lead

Most of the lead section talks about moral issues. Only a short reference about the mere existence of theological criticism is mentioned. The article itself however, talks about issues within Islamic theology, such as the allegedly miraculous Quran. Would someone mind to add other criticism than morality to the lead?--VenusFeuerFalle (talk) 13:35, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ambiguous statement in the lead

In current version, there is an ambiguous statement at the exact end of the lead: Similar arguments have been made in other countries in which Muslims are a minority, such as China, India and Russia. But it is not clear what similar arguments are being discussed. I couldnt understand either. Would someone kindly update/elaborate that sentence? Regards, —usernamekiran (talk) 07:15, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Usernamekiran: The statement seem to be continuation of previous sentence '...Some commentators have made assimilationist arguments against Muslim immigration to the Western world... Here the argument seems that Muslims do not easily assimilate in local culture or avoid local cultural assimilation.
That is quite regular criticism, This line of criticism believes that believer - non-believer (Kafir) binary emanating from mainstream conservative Islamic thought distances the individuals & community from mixing up with non Muslim communities effectively.
Since as a reader you could not make out, then, may be some fine tuning is required in the sentences.
Bookku, 'Encyclopedias are for expanding information and knowledge' (talk) 09:41, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I tweaked it. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:37, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Bookku and Anachronist: thank you folks. —usernamekiran (talk) 19:29, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Changed a very confusing sentence

The last sentence in the Sam Harris section of "ethics in the quran".

It was so confusing I had to click on the link to "jizya" to find out what it meant. The original sentence made it sound like the muslim ruler was paying the tax to non-muslims.

I also decided to put quotations around the word "protection" because it seemed to be used in the way that modern american gangsters use the term. This is very culturally specific, and people unfamiliar with modern american slang would probably assume that it's meaning was the common, non-slang, usage of the word.

Also it was kind of a run-on sentence that needed the word "and" in order to flow properly.

Ultimately this sentence was just a grammatical atrocity. Even if my edit is found to be unacceptable someone more skilled than myself needs to make sure that the new approach is more readable than the original. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.94.202.78 (talk) 03:30, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting inputs

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

and provide your inputs @

Thanks

Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 06:35, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Criticism_of_Islam&oldid=1091807809"