Jump to content

Talk:Hasan al-Askari

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by SSTbot (talk | contribs) at 09:08, 16 September 2018 (→‎top: Added {{vital article}}). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Vital article

Place of burial

I've got no knowledge at all about this article, but made an edit so that it references the Al Askari Mosque article, just as a good gesture kind of thing.

"Hasan was buried in the mausoleum containing the remains of his father, the Al Askari Mosque in Samarra."

I now realise after checking his year of death (874) against the year when the mosque was built (944) that the mausoleum and mosque are most likely two separate entities, although on the same site and/or one is part of the other.

With this in mind, should it be re-worded to something like this instead?

"Hasan was buried in the mausoleum containing the remains of his father, now part of the Al Askari Mosque in Samarra."

Hopefully someone with a bit more knowledge can figure out the correct way to word it :)

JesseLukeWalker 22:31, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is very biased

"Hassan Al-Askari was like a roaring river of wisdom, which quenched the thirst of those thirsty for it." This article needs a less biased rewrite --FagFaceCow (talk) 03:12, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Then please, rewrite it yourself! Research this person and create an unbiased article: that is what Wikipedia is all about. --Enzuru 03:13, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
NO U--FragFaceCow (talk) 18:56, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
O RLY? --Enzuru 19:28, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The whole article looks like copy&paste from "Shia for dummies" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:8070:25F8:4600:ACE0:47BE:85C3:2ADF (talk) 18:46, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable sources

I rewrote this article replacing the material which lacked reliable, verifiable sources with the reliable ones.Hadi (talk) 07:43, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Inclusion of "a narrative that says"

That is a huge block of text, much of it not in English, that makes no sense in the context of the article. It is as though someone has decided to put a soup recipe in the middle of the article. It is not a reference. It shows no relation to the rest of the article whatsoever. It is not appropriate to place a huge, apparently irrelevant story in the middle of the article. If there is some relevance, that massive swathe of writing needs reworking to give it context for the reader before it goes into the article. Please either do the work to explain why that text is there and why it is important or refrain from including it, please. Thanks. Dolescum (talk) 14:20, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

== hi,

1- it related to the context. context is talking about "ability to talk foreign language" and added 1st and 2nd arabic text is citing for that.

2- 3rd Arabic text is only complete story from previous version of wiki.

3- 4th Arabic text is shown better fact about his death. it improve this title of wiki.

4- 5th Arabic text is complete narrative of previous version of wiki.

as u see the Arabic text only improve the article. Hasan was in Arabic region and Arabic resources is more reliable of another.


for citing non-English resources in this link said: In the case of non-English sources, it may be helpful to quote from the original text and then give an English translation. If the article itself contains a translation of a quote from such a source (without the original), then the original should be included in the footnote. See Non-English sources in the verifiability policy for more information.



please give an wiki rule with reference of ur decision. thanks for improving article. 700ali (talk) 16:48, 16 March 2015 (UTC) 700ali (talk) 16:50, 16 March 2015 (UTC)==[reply]

No, it is not in context, you're not listening. This article is about Hasan al-Askari, not "ability to talk a foreign language". The Arabic text is not an improvement. People reading an English language encyclopedia expect to read English, not Arabic. They expect some explanation as to why a piece of text is there. You are providing neither of these.
The text in question is not a source. Wikipedia:Citing sources does not apply. Please explain to readers why the text is there. Dolescum (talk) 23:38, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]



please calm down and just talk about wiki rules instead of individuals decides.
every person that able to read and understand En, can find my claims.
The Arabic text is for checking the translation. if the translation is ok, so Arabic text should remove and En translation should remain. but if Arabic translation has problem,say it for editing translation.
thnx in advance
700ali (talk) 06:40, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Article text needs to rely on secondary sources and material has to be summarised, contextualised and integrated into the article. It must not consist of large blocks of translated text, let alone blocks of text which most readers of this particular Wikipedia cannot read. NebY (talk) 08:48, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dear 700ali. Please stop fighting and listen to those who are more experienced than you. Writing a wiki article is not about pouring large bulks of information in a wikipage. You can put al-Askari's quotations here which seems a better place for that kind of information. Regards Hadi (talk) 06:18, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

hi,
upper 4 no. seems define relation between added text and previous version of wiki. i checked some previous version. just arabic text removed and En translation related to context. 5.52.190.117 (talk) 06:56, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I do not understand what you're trying to say here. I see no reason why this large swathe of religiously motivated text needs to go into the article and the prior summary was insufficient. Even if the text was suitably contextulized, it is still undue weight to have a 1/3 of the article composed of religious anecdotes. We are not a religious text. Dolescum (talk) 15:12, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Jaffar al Zaki or Jaffar-us-Sani

Jaffar also known as Jaffar al Zaki or Jaffar-us-Sani: vide pages 406/407 of book "Riaz-ul Ansab" also known as "Gulzar-e-Naqi" placing therein written verdict of Ayatullah Sayyid Mar'ashi Najafi in Arabic duly stamped, containing advice to all Shia (Imamia) to refrain from saying him as TAWAB/KAZAB (a personal endeavor of the book compiler-Syed Maqsood Naqvi). This matter has already been accepted, and can be seen here[1] (09:24, 5 November 2013‎ 103.8.15.34). Thus rephrasing is made. Nannadeem (talk) 20:39, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Citations

Many of the citations only occur in large groups at the end of paragraphs, which makes it difficult to substantiate/clarify claims made in the article. For anyone interested, it would be very helpful to attach the sources to the sentences they correspond with. Emiskell (talk) 04:23, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Hasan al-Askari. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:04, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

edit

Editing to improve the articleM1nhm (talk) 04:34, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Correction

With ref to an old revision of Naqvi page histry as per link [2] disputed words"Ja'far the liar" or the "false Ja'far" should be deleted. According to my view point it is a violation of BLP as more than 70 per cent Naqvis in the subcontinent are descendants of Jafar al-Zaki also known Jafar-e-Sani. Nannadeem (talk) 16:10, 13 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]