Amr ibn Uthman was nominated for deletion. The debate was closed on 21 October 2012 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Uthman. The original page is now a redirect to here. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Uthman article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
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.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages 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.
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.
> Editing Talk:Uthman ibn Affan > Wikipedia does not yet have a page called Uthman ibn Affan.
That is confusing -- there is a page called Uthman ibn Affan, as I was just reading it. I wanted to post and say that it would be wonderful if someone would add the Arabic transcription of his name (as, eg, the page on Abu Bakr has). I hope I'm not inadvertently overwriting the page! --User:Geecee(talk) 17:06, 28 September 2004.
Zora, You mentioned that my contribution is highly contentious. I first thought that my input was deleted by someone else rather than the editors and that is why I reposted it again. Could you clarify what you found most polemic and I will be more than happy to discuss it.-- User:Tabari(talk) 10:39, 8 November 2005
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. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: move the page to Uthman, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 02:29, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
There's been a discussion on my talk page about moving this article to just Uthman, which is now a redirect. A Google books search shows this as more common than Uthman ibn Affan, so I don't see it as controversial, but wanted to mention it here before doing it. Dougweller (talk) 11:44, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
He is known to the living world by the name of Uthman ibn Affan and this is his real name. He is coined by the muslim world and its scholars for centuries by Uthman ibn Affan. So it is not appropriate to change the title of this article. Owais khursheed (talk) 15:07, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Oppose Uthman ibn Affan is clear and to the point. The proposed change has no benefit. Many other people are called Uthman - see Uthman (name).-- Toddy1(talk) 13:30, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
Comment: Just as there are many people named Muhammad, and I have a friend who was christened Jesus in South America where he tells me this is not uncommon (he calls himself Joshua in Australia). The question is, are these many other people famous enough (taken together) to call into doubt the claim that this Caliph is the primary meaning of the name? Evidence has been presented above that this is the primary meaning. Is there any evidence to the contrary? Andrewa (talk) 10:58, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
Support Of course this proposed change has benefit. In English Wikipedia, people's articles are listed under their most common names. And about Uthman, just "Uthman" is common not "Uthman ibn Affan". Many other people are also called Aisha, Ali or Umar but as you see their articles' titles are their most common names which are their first names. Keivan.fTalk 09:31, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
On 5 October 2014 user:Misconceptions2 deleted the paragraph about Nakhla with explanation 'fixed mistake'.
On 5 October 2014 user:Doug Weller undid the deletion with explanation "not an acceptable reason for deleting sourced text, take it to the talk page"
The source cited for the paragraph about Uthman's brother being captured at this event  does not actually contain any data about Nakhla, Uthman, or his brother. The author himself deleted the paragraph a day after adding it. The information presented is not supported by any other data I can find, and wouldn't even make sense - it would imply that the attacking Muslims captured one of their own people, rather than members of the caravan.
I do not believe deletion of this paragraph should be controversial, but please let me know if I am wrong. Zeeteepee (talk) 16:48, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
@Zeeteepee: Sure, go ahead. The editor didn't reply to my warning about removing it, so I assumed the removal was a bad removal. The editor got blocked for sockpuppetry shortly after. Doug Wellertalk 17:21, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
Nothing in the article on the compilation of the Quran allegedly by Uthman?
Nothing in the article on the compilation of the Quran allegedly by Uthman? Should be added. Ben-Yeudith (talk) 14:46, 3 May 2017 (UTC)