Remember that article talk pages are provided to coordinate the article's improvement only, and are not for engaging in discussion of off-topic matters not related to the main article. User pages are more appropriate for non-article-related discussion topics. Please do not use this page as a discussion forum for off-topic matters.See talk page guidelines.
This article is/was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s) Lwalker3 will be working on it.
This article was nominated for deletion on June 27 2006. The result of the discussion was Speedy Keep.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Edit warring by the IP user aside, there have been a couple of recent problematic changes to the last paragraph of the lead. I don't like the term "moderate Muslim" either, but that's the conceptual framework used by Abou El Fadl, who makes generalizations about "moderate Muslims" on one hand and "extremists" on the other. To make a statement about Muslims in general, we would need a different source. Also, the CN tag at the end is not required per WP:LEAD. The sentence summarizes contents of a sourced section. Eperoton (talk) 16:50, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
@Eperoton: But even with Muslims it' still correct, since the statement is phrased as: "... Muslims generally reject ..." 16:53, 30 January 2016 (UTC)CounterTime (talk)
@CounterTime: The statement may be correct, but it's not justified by the source we have any more than a source which says "the overwhelming majority of Sunnis..." could be rendered as "Muslims generally..." Eperoton (talk) 17:00, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
@Eperoton: Okay, then we would need to get to the original wording until we come upon another reference. 17:04, 30 January 2016 (UTC)CounterTime (talk)
On the inclusion of Tabataba'i in the section 'Views of modern Islamic scholars on the status of dhimmis in an Islamic society'
I think the quoted passage from Tabataba'i is completely WP:UNDUE, it's just taken from a piece of exegesis he offered and has no relation to his actual views on the status of dhimmis in an Islamic polity. The text also makes heavy WP:SYNTHESIS and distorts his view. Should it be thus deleted? @Eperoton: What do you think? 12:56, 27 February 2016 (UTC)CounterTime (talk)
@CounterTime: Tabataba'i seems to have been a prominent scholar, but it does seem to be WP:UNDUE that we have three traditional Shi'a opinions next to two opinions from traditional Sunni scholars and two opinions from authors with university careers. At least, the other two are maraji' (and more). I agree that WP:SYNTHESIS is a concern. The goal of this passage of his to clarify a statement from Ja'far al-Sadiq. The connection to politics in the modern age is not in the source. Aside from that, what does it actually mean that the verse "is not in conflict with the verse of fighting"? It's not the only problem with this section. In fact, the presentation of Shirazi's view raises the same concern about synthesis (I can't confirm due to lack of Persian abilities). We should get an opinion that reflects the treatment of religious minorities in Iran, which is far from idyllic, but doesn't correspond to the cited view by Khomeini, either. Eperoton (talk) 16:05, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
@Eperoton: I interpreted WP:UNDUE differently, I didn't object to whether or not the proportion of opinions from Sunni/Shiite Islam weren't equal, rather that the one who added the passage from Tabataba'i gives weight to that particular passage from his exegesis rather than try to find what his actual statements on the status of dhimmis in modern Islamic states were. So it should rather be called "off-topic" rather than WP:UNDUE. 16:46, 27 February 2016 (UTC)CounterTime (talk)
@CounterTime: I think WP:SYNTHESIS is the relevant policy here. The section can be improved in other ways to be more to the point. For example, al-Qaradawy takes some specific policy positions in the TV program from which the current quote is taken. I have it on my to do list to put them into the article. Eperoton (talk) 17:01, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
In this section I have noticed a number of mistakes such as lack of citations and a lack of a complete picture. For example, one sentence states, "Accustomed to survival in adverse circumstances after many centuries of discrimination and persecution within the Roman Empire, both pre-Christian and Christian, Jews saw the Islamic conquests as just another change of rulers". The idea that Jews were "accustomed to survival" is very biased and does not take in the individual experience. In addition, I plan to add information from Norman Stillman's article "Myth, Countermyth, and Distortion" that presents information of Jewish status of dhimmi's being a bad aspect of living under Arab rule. This information will help develop the debate between Stillman and Cohen (who is already presented in this subsection) of the conditions of Jewish status dhimmi's living under Arab control. Specifically, I would like to present how they disagree and why these debates are significant in understanding Jewish dhimmi status. I believe that so far this subsection only presents Cohen's argument that live as a dhimmi was not so bad, not Stillman's view that Jews still faced a life of strict law and a fear of oppression. If anyone has any comments about these changes, feel free to let me know.
Stillman, Norman. "Myth, Countermyth, and Distortion." Tikkun (May, 1991). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lwalker3 (talk • contribs) 07:17, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
@Lwalker3: I have no objection to adding Stillman's view, but the added paragraph has many problems, both linguistic and logical. I'm familiar with other writings by Stillman, and I'm pretty sure those problems weren't in the original. Since this article isn't readily available online, please quote the relevant passages so we can help to paraphrase them correctly. You've also deleted sourced content. The tagged unsouced portion is fair game to be challenged and removed, but you should either paraphrase the rest to preserve the sourced content or justify its removal. Eperoton (talk) 04:37, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
IP User:2601:282:4302:C8C0:88B4:CD07:A9E:DB1B removed the "religious discrimination" tag from this article, without bothering to leave an edit comment. Dhimitude is clearly an example of religious discrimination; it is a system of discriminatory laws applying only to non-muslims.
Accordingly I reverted the deletion, and it has been deleted again, and once more without an edit comment. Actually, it's hard to wedge a comment into that field, since most of the available space is occupied by this user's IPV6 address - but I can manage it.
So for the second time I've reverted the deletion. Please don't delete this tag again without attempting to discuss it here. MrDemeanour (talk) 08:35, 21 May 2016 (UTC)