Talk:Hindu–Islamic relations
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Hindu–Islamic relations article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 90 days  |
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
|
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
[edit]
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 3 September 2019 and 12 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Vedika mehta.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 23:28, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
Jhatka
[edit]@Iskandar323 I have removed the unsourced content that you tagged. There is no concept of Jhatka or Kutha in Hinduism. It is a Sikh concept. Feel free to remove them whenever you come accross them. If your concern is fixed, can you remove the tag that you added? Venkat TL (talk) 09:57, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
- Sure. Done. Iskandar323 (talk) 10:01, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
This is not true, nothing similar in Hinduism and Islam
[edit]Their is nothing similar in Hinduism and Islam. These two are totally different. In this article you have mentioned Muhammad and kalki are same. if this so, then why would kalki make practices such as meat eating, polygamy, marry a child girl, sex slavery, trading slaves etc etc halal when these all are no moral and worst things to practice to live a spiritual life according to Hindu religious books and scriptures? Please don't take someone's bogus speech without references or with wrong references so seriously to write an article on such a big platform to misguide people. Please read and then share knowledge. Jai Hind. Ram Ram.Jai Shree Ram 🙏 101.0.57.3 (talk) 08:32, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
- Please provide a source on this. RPI2026F1 (talk) 02:08, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
- 101.0.57.3 Do you think Hindus don't have or didn't have meat eating, Polygamy[1], marry a child girl, sex slavery, or engagement in trading slaves?[2][3]Thanks.Jonathansammy (talk) 22:51, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
References
- ^ Menski, W. (2008). Hindu law: Beyond tradition and modernity. Oxford University Press.
- ^ Gujarat and the Trade of East Africa, c. 1500-1800 Author(s): Edward A. Alpers Source: The International Journal of African Historical Studies, Vol. 9, No. 1 (1976), pp.22-44 Published by: Boston University African Studies Center Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/217389 Accessed: 25-08-2023 16:31 +00:00
- ^ Gupta, A. (2023). Rajbetis: Female Enslavement Under the 18th-Century Peshwa Rule (Doctoral dissertation, University of Delhi Delhi).[1]
Systematic bias?
[edit]Not to complain, but I want to point out that there is an immense focus on violance and possible conflicts and subtle (yet repeated) notion of alleged incompatibility between Islam and Hinduism (mostly argued on the basis of Monotheism against Polytheism). In comparison the article about Judaism and Hinduism mentioned in the info-box focuses on mutual respect and similarities. Is there no source available to structure this article less anti-islamic? 2A01:C23:9093:B600:D58E:E865:C298:D4E6 (talk) 01:10, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
Extensive content removal
[edit]@Drmies Greetings, may I inquire the reason behind that extensive removal of content? Was it by accident, or does the content suffer from severe lack of Wikipedia notability and relaible sources?
If so, maybe the article should be deleted entirely. VenusFeuerFalle (talk) 17:14, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- VenusFeuerFalle, what I removed were sections that described Hinduism and Islam--but for that we have articles: Islam and Hinduism. It's not unlike the "Comparison" sections we used to have in many articles on relations between countries. Here, look at this edit--that should clarify it. Useless information that wasn't about "relations", but gave certain characteristics of both countries (or here both religions) and set them up against each other. But such articles should be about "relations", not about some editor-selected comparison. Does that make sense? And in that sense this article is actually underdeveloped--there is so much more relevant content that needs to be written about, from the Mughal empire to today's India. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 18:43, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Drmies, Rather than removing the content entirely, it may have been more appropriate to consider renaming the article to "Islam and Hinduism" following the model of the 'Islam and Sikhism' article. StarkReport (talk) 21:45, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- Eh, maybe, StarkReport, but that's kind of weird: an article which is not what it is, and we rename it to make it what it should be? I mean that's fine with me, I guess, but you'll create something that--really I don't get it. Might as well create such articles for every single philosophy and religion and pair it up with another one, when Hindu-Islamic relations are actually really relevant. Drmies (talk) 22:40, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- I do see a point in that there are lots of questionable articles whose entries are not backed up by sources. However, there have been quite a few reliable sources exploring the relationship and interaction between India and Islam.
- At the same time, there was a lot of Original Research, just synthesizing material from Islam and Hinduism respectively. Hence my question, should the entire article be removed and the few noteworthy parts integrated into the History article or should we filter out the good parts and remove the Original Research?
- Such a huge step might be worth of a discussion with other Users first, so we all know where we are heading towards, and to make sure one has not overseen anything important.
- From what I see, you suggest to limit the article to the historical development. I tend to agree with that, but some parts of the removed concent discussed theological developments. These may be restored again (as long as the sources discuss them explicitly as Hindu-Islam-relation). VenusFeuerFalle (talk) 20:05, 24 October 2024 (UTC)
- Eh, maybe, StarkReport, but that's kind of weird: an article which is not what it is, and we rename it to make it what it should be? I mean that's fine with me, I guess, but you'll create something that--really I don't get it. Might as well create such articles for every single philosophy and religion and pair it up with another one, when Hindu-Islamic relations are actually really relevant. Drmies (talk) 22:40, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Drmies, Rather than removing the content entirely, it may have been more appropriate to consider renaming the article to "Islam and Hinduism" following the model of the 'Islam and Sikhism' article. StarkReport (talk) 21:45, 21 October 2024 (UTC)