| Revision as of 00:06, 1 November 2019 editSineBot (talk | contribs)Bots2,555,612 editsm Signing comment by 178.232.134.166 - "→Non objective parts in the article: new section"← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 03:17, 16 March 2024 edit undoHarryboyles (talk | contribs)Administrators159,000 editsm →top: fixing Islam-and-Controversy parameter in {{WikiProject Islam}}Tag: AWB |
| (66 intermediate revisions by 20 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
{{talk header}} |
|
{{talk header}} |
|
|
{{Not a forum}} |
|
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1= |
|
|
⚫ |
{{Old AfD multi|result='''keep'''|date=] ]}} |
| ⚫ |
{{WikiProject Islam|class=C|importance=mid|Islam and Controversy=yes}} |
|
|
⚫ |
{{summary in|Criticism of the Qur'an|Women and Islam}} |
| ⚫ |
{{WikiProject Gender Studies|class=C}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Women's History|class=C|importance=mid}} |
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|1= |
|
|
{{WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography|importance=Low}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Feminism|importance=Low}} |
|
⚫ |
{{WikiProject Gender studies|importance=Low}} |
|
⚫ |
{{WikiProject Islam|importance=Mid|Islam-and-Controversy=yes}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Psychology|importance=Low}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Sociology|importance=Low}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Women's History|importance=Mid}} |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
{{Not a forum}} |
|
{{Annual readership}} |
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
|archiveheader = {{talk archive navigation}} |
|
|archiveheader = {{talk archive navigation}} |
| Line 16: |
Line 23: |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Source does not support what is written == |
| ⚫ |
{{summary in|Criticism of the Qur'an|Women and Islam}} |
|
| ⚫ |
{{Old AfD multi|result='''keep'''|date=] ]}} |
|
|
|
|
|
== Addition of more religious text and ] == |
|
|
|
|
|
I have just reverted the addition of yet another tract of religious text accompanied by exactly zero reliable secondary sources that discuss it. That is an ongoing problem with this article. |
|
|
|
|
|
{{ping|Arsi786}} Please avoid adding religious text without also including a discussion of the context — and that discussion must not be your own views or interpretation, but the views and interpretations properly attributed to reliable secondary sources, per Misplaced Pages editorial policies and guidelines ], ],], and ]. ~] <small>(])</small> 21:37, 28 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:{{ping|Anachronist}} The expression qawwam is an intensive form of qa’im (‘one who is responsible for’ or ‘takes care of’ a thing or a person). Thus, qama ala I-mar’ah signifies ‘he undertook the maintenance of the woman’ or ‘he maintained her‘ (see Lane VIII, 2995). The grammatical form qawwam is more comprehensive than qa’im, and combines concepts of physical maintenance and protection as well as of moral responsibility‘ (Asad).” 9 Tafsir Ishraq Al-Ma’ani – Being A Quintessence Of Qur’anic Commentaries by Syed Iqbal Zaheer, VOL. II (Volume 2), page 236) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In the chapter "Incidence among Muslims" it sais at the very top: ''"Domestic violence is considered to be a problem in Muslim-majority cultures, but because women conceal signs of abuse and don't report domestic abuse to authorities, the incidence in many Muslim-majority countries is uncertain, but believed to be great by Muslim feminists."''. The first sentence is supported by the source. The second sentence is not supported by the source (https://web.archive.org/web/20060112080841/http://web.amnesty.org/report2005/sau-summary-eng). |
|
:The hadith is self explanatory while i provided the verse which was posted was not translated properly so i gave a correct one alo the other hadiths have no explanations either. |
|
|
|
# The source covers only Saudi-Arabia, so all statements about "many Muslim-majority countries" although they are probably true, are unsupported. |
|
:~] <small>(])</small> 22:43, 28 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
# The source does not say anything about "Muslim feminists". |
|
|
# The source does not say anything about what those supposed feminists believe to be true. The source focuses on the case of Rania al-Baz und connected issues. The only part where supposed feminists might have been addressed is ''"Women activists, writers, journalists and lawyers called for legal and judicial changes to end such discrimination and combat the impunity enjoyed by perpetrators of violence against women."''. This is by any means not what this Misplaced Pages article instanciated. |
|
|
# The source sais nothing about "concealing signs of abuse" and not "report domestic abuse". |
|
|
Since the article is in a protected state, whoever has the right to edit it, please fix the part of the article as soon as possible. Add a supporting source and/or re-write it in a way that matches the source. Using the term "feminists", which is often used and/or understood in a pejorative way and even if not, implies a bias, is uncalled for, unscientific and misleading. Name who or what actually expressed their belief that the number of incidents is great. The issue is way too important to be this misleading. Readers who check sources or dislike "feminists" are driven to just go to the source, discover that it does not support the statement written in the Misplaced Pages article and dismiss it as unfactual, stop reading further and walk around high and mighty telling people that domestic abuse is a rare occurence in the realm of Islam. Well done, whoever wrote that introduction. Whoever is willing to help us all out by correcting the part, be assured of my deepest gratitude. --] (]) 10:16, 26 December 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
:Thanks for pointing this out. I've expanded the part based on the Washington Post piece a bit to provide more context, while removing the dated Amnesty International report specific only to Saudi Arabia, as this is not useful to cite in a general summary. ] (]) 12:44, 26 December 2021 (UTC) |
|
::In my revert there were two issues. |
|
|
::One was Quran 4:34, which you changed significantly without explanation. I have fixed the citation using the Misplaced Pages {{tl|Cite Quran}} template to point at the actual translation it came from. The translation by ] is the most concise translation and uses words that speak directly to the topic of domestic violence, which is the subject of this article. |
|
|
::The other problem was the addition of the hadith. No, it isn't self-explanatory. An encyclopedia article isn't an indiscriminate list of anything that might pertain to the article topic. If you want to include additional text, you need to accompany it with citations to reliable sources that discuss that specific hadith in the context of domestic violence. You didn't provide such sources, and we generally don't cite the ] without also citing scholarly discussion ''about'' the source. Until that context is provided, the hadith doesn't belong in this article about domestic violence. ~] <small>(])</small> 22:04, 28 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== WikiProject Crime banner reinstated == |
|
:{{ping|Anachronist}} How is it concise when he mistranslated the word and there other version who also use the word protector and my verse does not remove the beating part also pickhall uses the word scourge and not the beating one? |
|
|
:~] <small>(])</small> 22:43, 28 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
::Pickthall is (I believe) the most contemporary translation, and we tend to favor the works of more recent scholars when possible. However, I'm not really too concerned about which translation is used as long as it's relevant to this article. I won't object to you changing it again, as long as you also change the citation to point at the appropriate translation (the citation currently uses the parameter t=p for "translation=pickthall", so change that parameter accordingly). |
|
|
::My main concern was the addition of the hadith with your own personal commentary and no reference to any discussion by reliable secondary sources about the relevance to domestic violence in Islam. ~] <small>(])</small> 22:42, 28 March 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
==addition of Hadith along with secondary source that grades it sahih== |
|
|
I have added following with reference |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am not sure why {{User|Akh of an akh}} removed the banner for ], but I have reinstated it because this topic is definitely of interest to WikiProject Crime. In doing so, I realized that the WikiProject Crime was displaying a C-class rating because the B-class assessment questions had not been completed. When this is the case the rating defaults to C-class. Given the assessment of other projects I am going to answer the B-class assessment in the positive. If anybody wants to remove the WikiProject Crime banner in the future please provide a sound explanation for doing so in the edit summary or discuss its removal, first. - 09:14, 15 February 2022 (UTC) |
|
It was narrated that Sulayman bin Amr bin Ahwas said: “My father told me that he was present at the Farewell Pilgrimage with the Messenger of God. He praised and glorified God, and reminded and exhorted (the people). Then he said: 'I enjoin good treatment of women, for they are helpers of you, and you have no right to treat them otherwise, unless they commit lewdness. If they do that, then forsake them in their beds and hit them, but without causing injury or leaving a mark. If they obey you, then do not seek means of annoyance against them. You have rights over your women and your women have rights over you. Your rights over your women are that they are not to allow anyone whom you dislike to tread on your bedding, nor allow anyone whom you dislike to enter your houses. And their right over you are that you should treat them kindly with regard to their clothing and food.' ” (sunan ibn Majah vol. 3 book. 9 Hadith 1851) |
|
|
|
:I notice that {{User|Akh of an akh}} again removed the banner for ] though this time stating in the edit summary that ''This page has nothing related to "crime". This is a critical implication of that Islam promotes a "crime"'' By adding the WikiProject Crime banner, I am not implying that "''Islam promotes "crime"''" and I am sorry if the user has taken that implication from addition of the WikiProject Crime banner. Addition of the banner means the article is "''of interest''" to WikiProject Crime, because it falls within the project's scope. The overarching article about ] is currently included in the scope of WikiProject Crime, so it is inconsistent to say that "''This page has nothing related to "crime".''" when the article title includes the words ''domestic violence''. How Islam views and deals with domestic violence and whether or not it considers the concept of domestic violence to be criminal, considering the laws of many nations where Islam is practiced do consider domestic violence to be a crime, is a topic that is of interest to readers of Misplaced Pages. The summary of the article notes that the way Islamic jurisprudence interprets the subject varies and there are often difficulties having abuse recognized by police or the judicial system. In my view, the article is discussing a criminal related topic merely by mentioning the police and judicial system. If one reads deeper, one find that the article discusses a husband's liability for the death of his wife, as well a initiatives in different countries to move domestic violence cases away from religious courts to penal code driven courts. The later part of the article also talks about various laws in Muslim-majority countries where rape or murder of one's wife are now subject to criminal penalties. Given this sort of content, I would content that this article is a crime related topic, so it remains of interest to WikiProject Crime. So I think the banner should be reinstated. However, before I do that, I would welcome others opinions. - ] (]) 10:44, 17 February 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Semi-protected edit request on 30 October 2023 == |
|
The above Hadith is graded Sahih by Darussalam. <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 10:39, 9 April 2018 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
|
== mistranslation == |
|
|
In a hadith it was writtern that there was amark on herdue to domestic violence. This waswritten within brackets showing that it was translater’s view that he thought mark was caused due to beating. So i think it should be removedto make hadith better. Thanks <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 10:45, 10 April 2018 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{edit semi-protected|Islam and domestic violence|answered=yes}} |
|
== Non objective parts in the article == |
|
|
|
1: |
|
|
in the part of the article that says "Ibn Kathir(1300-1373AD) and Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari(839-923AD)" |
|
|
needs spaces between names and dates, spaces before AD, and dashes should be en dashes. change to "Ibn Kathir (1300–1373 AD) and Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari (839–923 AD)" |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2: |
|
Q: in what encyclopedia does it say (peace be upon him) after mentioning Muhammad? How does that adhere to objectivity? |
|
|
|
remove the 2 excess blank lines before the section header <nowiki> |
|
|
===Undesirability of beating===</nowiki> ] (]) 05:45, 30 October 2023 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
:Changes applied ] (]) 17:42, 30 October 2023 (UTC) |
|
In addition, where do all the extra additions in brackets come from while quoting the quran or hadith? How exactly did you decide that -first- you condemn your wife, -second- don't share the same bed with her and only then -third- are alllowrd to beat her -lightly-. Such interpertations do not appear in the original text and should not appear in an objective encyclopedia. <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 00:05, 1 November 2019 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
Since the article is in a protected state, whoever has the right to edit it, please fix the part of the article as soon as possible. Add a supporting source and/or re-write it in a way that matches the source. Using the term "feminists", which is often used and/or understood in a pejorative way and even if not, implies a bias, is uncalled for, unscientific and misleading. Name who or what actually expressed their belief that the number of incidents is great. The issue is way too important to be this misleading. Readers who check sources or dislike "feminists" are driven to just go to the source, discover that it does not support the statement written in the Misplaced Pages article and dismiss it as unfactual, stop reading further and walk around high and mighty telling people that domestic abuse is a rare occurence in the realm of Islam. Well done, whoever wrote that introduction. Whoever is willing to help us all out by correcting the part, be assured of my deepest gratitude. --77.8.234.217 (talk) 10:16, 26 December 2021 (UTC)
1:
in the part of the article that says "Ibn Kathir(1300-1373AD) and Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari(839-923AD)"
needs spaces between names and dates, spaces before AD, and dashes should be en dashes. change to "Ibn Kathir (1300–1373 AD) and Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari (839–923 AD)"
