Talk:Musaylima

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles

Islam Low‑importance

	Islam portal 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.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Arab world Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Arab world, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Arab world 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.Arab worldWikipedia:WikiProject Arab worldTemplate:WikiProject Arab worldArab world articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

On 2 December 2021, it was proposed that this article be moved from Musaylimah to Musaylima. The result of the discussion was moved.

Relatively Minor Change

I removed the section which somehow had been introduced containing Telugu references and replaced it with a reference to al-Baladhuri which covered the same material.

The whole article could be improved. I will do that soem time when I have more time. DKleinecke (talk) 20:54, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Copied from

A lot of this seems to be copied directly from: http://www.swordofallah.com/html/bookchapter14page3.htm

Although the link is referenced, is this copyright violation? (unsigned)

Is it not parafrased good enough?

--Striver 21:55, 31 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No, it is not neutral enough. Str1977 ^(talk) 14:55, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

yes, it is. Scythian1 (talk) 17:01, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Removed Section with Lack of Source

Title says it all Fudk (talk) 23:26, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Appropriate source addedScythian1 (talk) 07:27, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Musaylima Bin Habib Is was not a magician

historians of Quraysh tribe made an accusation to ( Ansi and Musaylima ) of claiming Prophethood — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abdullah ALkathiri (talk • contribs) 15:40, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Proclaiming prophethood/ Death

I deleted to following passages due to lack of credible sources, much less academic:

" He is the one who changed the Quran to Mushaf, Quran in the order of revelation is called Quran, as Musaylimah being a Magician he knew the after effects of changing the order of Quran and he arranged the Surahs from Fathiha making Muslims slaves and causing great magic on them by Mushaf. till Muslims read the Quran in Chronological Order they will be in that curse"

" Reference sheik Imran Hosein: Dajjal end Times, Gog and Magog, Jerusalem in Quran"

" Alternate: He killed all the Caliph and rewrote Hadith and blamed the Quran compilation on the Caliphs, Although it is the Sunnah to read the Quran in the Order of Revelation, All the people memorized the Quran from Muhammed, who memorized it from the Angel Gabriel. Angel Gabriel brought the Quran down in Chronological Order Chronological Order: The perfect Order in which Allah architecture the Quran."

" http://www.scribd.com/doc/201878485/Should-The-Quran-Be-Read-In-The-Order-Of-Revelation#scribd"

Further proof of false information in the previous statements is the contradictory claim that Musaylimah orchestrated the ordering of Quranic Surahs lengthwise instead of chronologically when he died during the Kilafah of Abu Bakr, the first Caliph, and the compilation wasn't started until the Kilafah of Uthman, the third Caliph. (~~Lithiumman~~)

POV Dispute

A little bit of digging around reveals that Musaylimah is regarded as a preacher of Hanifism by some people holding a significant role in Hanifism's alternative view on the authorship of Arabic Holy Scripture. The current wording of the article is heavily from a Muhammedan point of view. Bulgarios (talk) 12:17, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bulgarios I did dig up. Show us any reliable source that "Hanifism" is related to Musylimah. Also it's called Islam not "Muhammadan"--SharabSalam (talk) 07:49, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And what is a Hanfi Christian? Lmao.--SharabSalam (talk) 07:53, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

1) Try searching google for "Musaylima" and "Hanifism" together. You can't miss them.

2) I prefer the term Muhammedan or Islamist.

3) Hanifi-Christian is a typo. It should be Hanifa Christians as in the Banu Hanifa Christians.

I can see a couple of edits I made on Hanif related topics to lean them away from the current heavily biased Muhammedan/Islamist point of view (to which yuo have restored them) in some such articles have offended your fundamental religiosity for which I apologise. At the same time the heavy Muhammedan/Islamist POV will eventually have to be edited out of such articles. If not by a coward like me then by someone with more backbone. Unless of course Muhammedans come to dominate the world, in which case wikipedia will become the principle propaganda tool for that agenda. But hopefully that time is still very far away yet. Bulgarios (talk) 13:15, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I did search Musaylimah is from Banu Hanifa tribe that has nothing to do with Hanifism which is totally unrelated. Hanifa is a name that Arabs use. It's a person name that the tribe named after. Hanif is even written differently in Arabic. It so mind-blowing that you are confusing the tribe of Banu Hanifa with Hanif lol--SharabSalam (talk) 13:34, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Banu Hanifa were Christians just like the tribe of Taglib, Ghassan and other tribes. There is no fucking relationship between Hanifi faith that is mentioned in the Quran and Banu Hanifa tribe. LOOOOOOL.. ---SharabSalam (talk) 13:42, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

At the same time the heavy Muhammedan/Islamist POV will eventually have to be edited out of such articles. If not by a coward like me then by someone with more backbone. Unless of course Muhammedans come to dominate the world, in which case wikipedia will become the principle propaganda tool for that agenda. But hopefully that time is still very far away yet.

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂--13:55, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

SharabSalam, do not engage at all if you can not engage constructively without resorting to trolling. Bulgarios (talk) 14:23, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bulgarios Am I the one who is trolling?? Look what you said. There is absolutely no relationship between Musylimah and Hanif. You find Musylimah name next to his tribe name "Hanifa" which has nothing to do with Hanif. Do you acknowledge how much you are wrong??-SharabSalam (talk) 14:27, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You are commenting from a position of offended fundamental religiosity rather than from a position of cool level-headed fact seeker. Musaylimah itself is a derogatory insult his real name was Maslamah bin Habib and he led the Banu Hanifa in spreading the message of Hanifism in Arabia. His tribe was attacked and slaughtered by the Caliphists. You clearly have not googled "Hanifism" yet. It is not an Islamist/Muhammedan faith. Bulgarios (talk) 14:32, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, not really. I am not offended. Anyway you said he led the Banu Hanifa in spreading the message of Hanifism in Arabia. Could you provide a source for that? I have googled Hanifism and I know what it means.--SharabSalam (talk) 14:37, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You clearly have not googled Hanifism. Can you provide any non-wiki source about Hanifism which does not mention Musaylimah? I would like to see one.Bulgarios (talk) 14:40, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bulgarios Lol it is you who should provide sources.--SharabSalam (talk) 14:42, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

OK, then the dispute remains unresolved. Bulgarios (talk) 14:46, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bulgarios There is no dispute here except that you just don't like it. There is no sources that say Musaylimah was what you said.--SharabSalam (talk) 14:49, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Actually it is you who have proven that you justdont like another opi iin on Musaylimah other than the Islamist POV Bias that you insist the article should remain uncured from. Bulgarios (talk) 17:21, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you keep removing the sources? What have you got against the Catholic Encyclopedia?Bulgarios (talk) 07:42, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 2 December 2021

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Lennart97 (talk) 13:37, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Musaylimah → Musaylima – The dominant spelling is without the h. Srnec (talk) 01:00, 2 December 2021 (UTC)— Relisting. —usernamekiran • sign the guestbook • (talk) 04:34, 12 December 2021 (UTC)— Relisting. Colonestarrice (talk) 12:12, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is a contested technical request (permalink). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 09:57, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Srnec and John Cline: queried move request Anthony Appleyard (talk) 09:58, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Srnec, I believe this move should be discussed first. The current title has been stable for 17 years and page view statistics show the page being visited 173 times a day by the current title[1] compared to 16 times a day for the requested title.[2] Searching with Google also seems to favor the current title.--John Cline (talk) 03:29, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

before we agree or not, maybe we should hear the reasoning of request? Ahendra (talk) 02:40, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support as nom. Both the Encyclopedia of Islam, 2nd ed., and the Encyclopaedia of the Qurʾān spell it Musaylima. Ngrams supports it, too. Srnec (talk) 00:14, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.