Talk:Taqiya

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Talk:Taqiyya)
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Islam / Shi'a Islam (Rated Start-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
This article is supported by the Shi'a Islam task force (marked as Top-importance).
 
WikiProject Religion (Rated Start-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Please review Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines and note the following guideline: "Do not use the talk page as a forum or soapbox for discussing the topic. The talk page is for discussing improving the article."

Definition addition[edit]

The definition here reflects standard references on this topic, which are reasonably consistent in their definition (as is Brill's E. of the Quran [1]). Introducing alternative phrasing based on a passing comment in a chapter on another topic (modern Druze-Jewish relations) is WP:UNDUE. These additions are either redundant (near-synonyms in translation), sloppy (the overly vague terms "beliefs" and "crisis"), or simply incorrect (the author is saying that the Druze derived the practice from their Shia heritage, not that all other sects adopted it from the Shia). Eperoton (talk) 23:16, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Okay. I will just remove the parts that you have a problem with.Music314812813478 (talk) 02:16, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. I have a problem with the Shiite origin too. First, the refs you added aren't RSs. There's a community consensus that Spencer isn't reliable, most recently expressed on the appropriate noticeboard. It looks like you're also citing Raymond Ibrahim (by the way, when citing books please specify a page number, and the author/title of the chapter if it's an edited volume, as discussed in WP:CITEHOW). Ibrahim has no scholarly stature and so he isn't reliable either. If an academic volume published by Springer commissioned his work, we could use it, but this particular volume is a collection of previously published essays compiled by retired generals, and as the preface makes clear, it's not a scholarly volume. Furthermore, the statement contradicts standard references on the subject, none of which suggest that Sunnis borrowed the notion or practice from the Shia. In fact, the cited peer-reviewed paper by Mariuma says that Shia scholars "increased the scope and importance of a pre-existing concept in Sunni law".
As for the translations, I don't even know why you're making the addition. The first sentence should be as little cluttered by non-essential information as possible. Arguably even the words "caution" and "prudence" were too close to each other to both be included there, but "carefulness" and "weariness" are plainly redundant. Eperoton (talk) 23:43, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Contemporary debate edit war[edit]

This material [2] had been added and removed five times. The last two additions dropped the external YouTube link [3] but there are definitely still problems with the material. "For those in the West, taqiyya is used to..." is sourced to various Quran verses. It does not explain what "For those in the West" means, and I'm sure the Quran verses don't make any such distinction. This is confusing and poorly sourced. Quran verses themselves do not support any statement about contemporary interpretation of taqiyya, in the West or elsewhere.

The rest of the paragraph is completely unsourced and appears to be OR/opinion. Deception is also permitted when it is a white lie. According to whom? Considering all of this, it may be that technically Islamic scholars are correct to try to say that the use of taqiyya is an inaccurate and inflationary use of the word, but Raymond Ibrahim is correct in his consideration of taqiyya by his definition. is full of weasel wording ("may be", "technically", "try to", "by his definition") and ends with the editor's opinion stated as fact. It's not clear who is responsible for It is a complicated subject that is counter intuitive to those with Western values. Is this an unsourced claim about what Raymond Ibrahim says, or is this editorializing by the Wikipedia editor? Meters (talk) 19:31, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

@Audeamus42: Please discuss here before reinserting. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 19:46, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Repeated content?[edit]

The content below appears in the article twice:

Islamic scholars claim that taqiyya is only permissible under duress, and that the inflationary use of the term qualifies as "a staple of right-wing Islamophobia in North America" (Mohammad Fadel 2013), or "Taqiyya libel against Muslims"[16] while their critics accuse them of practicing "taqiyya about taqiyya" (Raymond Ibrahim, 2014).

Maybe we should remove one occurrence of it? Ahyangyi (talk) 15:23, 6 December 2017 (UTC)