Talk:Ghazu

Untitled[edit]

The burden is on you to demonstrate that your material is from a reliable source. Material must satisfy WP:RS. It is widely recognized on wikipedia that Karen Armstrong is not a scholar of Islam, just a writer. What are her qualifications? She doesn't have any. Compare to the actual Islamic Studies professors we use as sources. Arrow740 09:30, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

first read the List of Muslim scholars, her name is there.
second, Reliable sources are "authors or publications regarded as trustworthy or authoritative in relation to the subject at hand" and do not have to be a scholar
As I said in comment, if you want to prove that she is unreliable, prove it by citing a supporting source and don't just say "widely recognized"! Do not remove content, add your source to the article if they present a different view.
Don't start calling sources as unreliable who do not comply to your POV (as we see you doing at other Wikipedia edits). ~atif - 12:22, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The burden is on the editor who wishes to add material to prove that it should be here. Karen Armstrong is not qualified. RS doesn't mean anything you want it to. Otherwise we would be using Robert Spencer and Ibn Warraq in the articles on Islam and Muhammad, and I don't think you would like that. Arrow740 17:47, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean "we" - do you belong to some group of people? Pls use your quoted sources (spencer etc.), I do not have any objection to it (Anyways Spencer is heavily quoted in Criticism of Quran article). But do not start making wrong accusations to scholars like Karen Armstrong that she is not reliable without a proof.~atif - 13:16, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]